Find a Lawyer

DAWOOD ISLAMIC BANK LIMITED versus ADMORE GAS (PVT.) LIMITED

Section 9 Mark Bank Debt Recovery Despite issuing notices to defendants, they did not file a leave application to defend the case, but nothing was available on record that can be inferred. That the amount claimed by the bank was not due and the defendants would not be paid to the bank, especially when the legal notice was sent despite the receipt of the defendants, it was not answered and the liability mentioned therein Was not disputed or denied and the defendants only stated that they were to return to it from time to time. Will be The plaintiff's profit was accepted against the Marabah facility as a joint profit with the financial profit, and the Charity Facility against the Marjah and the leasehold facility was rejected because it was nothing but any form. I could not allow a bank suit. Nance suit was ordered accordingly to the extent of the amount mentioned in the summary of the accounts minus charity against Marabah and Monopoly.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012

• ZULFIQAR HUSSAIN v. BAMBINO (PVT) LIMITED 2012 CLD 252
• Mst. AMINA BAI v. Mrs. NAFISA ZAKARIA 2012 PLD 258
• ALL PAKISTAN SECURITY AGENCIES ASSOCIATION (APSAA) through Secretary v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Human Resources Development 2012 PLC 258
• MUEEN AFTAB SHAIKH v. THE STATE through FIA KARACHI 2012 PLD 261
• ABID IQBAL v. EXPORT PROCESSING ZONES AUTHORITY through Chairman 2012 CLC 264
• ABID IQBAL v. EXPORT PROCESSING ZONES AUTHORITY 2012 CLD 267
• GUL HASSAN v. MUHAMMAD USMAN 2012 PCrLJ 268
• MUHAMMAD ALI v. State 2012 PLD 272

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2012 →

power of attorney advocate Hub Chowki lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes