MUNIR AHMAD BHATTI versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR THROUGH SECRETARY
Section 2 State Bank of Pakistan Circular No. BSD (RU 51) / 47 / ECL / 17913/2001 Dated 7 12 2001 State Bank of Pakistan Circular No. BSD (RU 51) ECL / 47 / 20162/2000, Article 5 12000 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Response Bank, Name of the Applicant through the State Bank of Pakistan Was successful in adding to the list. It was discriminatory to have the defaulter and his name in the ECL; on a simple request of the lending bank, not supported by any court order, the State Bank of Pakistan did not have the authority to name the customer. Send it to the federal government for placement in the CL. Similarly, before taking any action against the user of the Bank Guide Line and Circulars issued by the State Bank of Pakistan, especially Circular No. BSD (RU 51) / 47 / ECL / 17913/2001, 7 The federal government also has to make up its mind. 12 2001 and BSD (RU 51) ECL / 47 / According to the above two notifications, according to the apex court of Peru, two thousand notifications showed that the State Bank of Pakistan had wrongly defaulted on the banks themselves. Given the option that it was a defaulter without the customer hearing it. Regarding the frame of instructions / circulation that the agreement between the consumer and the bank had no legal value in their review and that the bank was always right, no law was intended and they did not realize that Pakistan was a democratic one. There is a country where the constitution goes beyond and everyone has to comply with the law. Notification frames mentioned above
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
