NISHAT IMPEX (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH REPRESENTATIVE versus HABIB BANK LTD. THROUGH DULY AUTHORIZED ATTORNEYS
Sections 9, 10 and 18 were found to have sued for the removal and cancellation of bank documents prepared by the bank on the basis of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 11 and O. VII, R 11, blank and forged documents. Not filing an appeal by the lenders against such a decree, by the Banking Court, deciding the bank's first case to recover the loan amount. In the relevant time, Vladity Bank had the option of obtaining the borrower's signature on the blank documents, signing the borrower's blank documents 20 years before implementation. The Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance 2001 would be equivalent to agreeing to the terms of their position, after which the bank allowed the date and money to be repaid at another time, if Plaintiff had agreed to use the loan as a loan. The cause of action in the case was not disclosed, the entertainment would eliminate the effect of such a decree, which was finalized against it, the creditors' case was struck by the judiciary's principle of justice. , The case was dismissed under overs. VII, R 11, CPC, under conditions \ r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
