Sections 9 and 22 decide on the cost of bank loan recovery appeal funds and service fees and the decree passed by the banking court on the basis that the bank was entitled to receive the correct fee service from the respondent. Which was presented to the defendant by the bank. Ended on 22 6 2007, when the defendant stopped receiving the facility and the credit card in question was cut in two pieces and left in the drop box of the respective branch of the bank, after such date No justification for receiving the service fee was available. In this case the justification can be granted only if the defendant is still using the facility after committing the default and the bank is offering the service at which rate the service fee was to be charged by the bank. But the parties never agreed and no specific rate was mentioned in the plaintiff's statement. The markup / profit in the accounts cannot be recovered without mutual agreement and / or the user cannot be fined twice for the same Wro after a longer period of mutual agreement. NG / default and for the same period, from the date of default from one side to the other, to fulfill its obligation by receiving a service fee or any other penalty and claiming the cost of the funds on the other. From the same date of default, the bank was not entitled to service fees for the same period, after the bank provided the bank with a cost of funds on the amount claimed by the bank, the High Court refused to intervene. done. The judgment and order passed by the banking court, in the circumstances, were dismissed.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
