NOOR ISLAM versus CRESCENT LEASING CORPORATION LTD.
Sections 9 and 10 defend the suit to recover the bank loan, the defendant obtained financial benefit for the purchase of the vehicle but failed to pay the financial leave to defend the case. The court dismissed and the case was decided by the defendant in favor of the financial institution claiming that the financial institution had repossessed the vehicle, and, therefore, discharged it to defend the case. Should have been found, the re-possession documents filed by the accused along with such statement were also examined. On the letter of the financial institution stating that the vehicle was not owned by it, the banking court concluded that the financial institution had re-acquired the documents and did not retrieve the vehicle from the financial institution. The search for a banking court was based on sound reasons. , It did not demand interference by the High Court. There was an understandable issue among the serious and misunderstood parties so that the evidence could be recorded and resolved so that the banking court could properly grant leave to defend the case. Was rejected and the trial was dismissed in favor of the financial institution.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
