Section 10, Leave to Defend Sue, Defendants 'Appeal for Defendants' Objection was that the plaintiff's foreign bank's suit filed by the Karachi Branch under Company Ordinance, 1984 was not worth it, because the State The license was issued by the Bank of Pakistan for the establishment of a bank in Pakistan. Subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions, which were not fulfilled, the plaintiff cannot be called a "financial institution" for purposes of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance, 2001. That the Karachi Branch was not responsible for any of its external head office affiliations as the plaintiff was a separate entity. There is no reason for action in Karachi or anywhere else in Pakistan. And that the plaintiffs' claims were targeted by time restriction and the Res Judeta doctrine. Such objections can be decided after the formation of the cases and the recording of the evidence claims attached to the assets and the securities of the accused. This claim can be marked until I realize it and until then. The High Court did not allow applications for leave to defend the case under the circumstances. \ r \ n
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
