MY BANK LIMITED versus MUSLIM COTTON MILLS (PVT.) LTD.
On the respondent's request for delay in filing an application for delay of application under Section 9 (5) and 10 Litigation Act (IX of 1908), section 5 imposes a limitation case for recovery of loan amount. Delays delays. 11 In 2010, a guard at his factory informed her of the High Court bailiff that he had issued his summons, which he refused to submit, whereupon he arrived at court and obtained copies of the applications. Of That it was presented in the paper by the publication of the summons in the newspaper on 10 10 2010 2010 and filed its leave application on 11 11 2010, in accordance with Section 9 (5) of the Financial Institutions (Restoration) Ordinance 2001. If affected, by any of the methods specified in it, the Respondent did not deny or invalidate its services as of publication on 23 10 2010 nor did the Respondent. The choice of will prevail, nor will it be allowed to decide. The service procedure will be considered as one of the four fixed methods, yet through publication its services had filed a leave request beyond the stipulated period; the High Court dismissed the leave request due to time constraints. Done \ r \ n
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
