Find a Lawyer

‑‑ O. VII, r. 10 read with Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance (XIX of 1979), Ss. 2 (a), 6 (i) (a)‑Plaint Return of‑Debtor instituting suit in Special Court for injuncting Bank from selling his goods for realization of Rs. 2,20,755. plus interest thereon and alternatively asking for refund of his money received by bank‑‑Debtor fixing value of suit for purposes of court fees and jurisdiction at Rs. 200‑Special Judge ordering return of plaint to be presented to Court of competent jurisdiction‑Out standing amount of loan against debtor exceeding one lac rupees and his claim in respect and arising out of such loan‑‑Held, Special Court had exclusive jurisdiction to try and dispose of suit exercising powers vested in Civil Court,

A, Karim Malik for. Appellant.

M. Muhammad Yaqub Khan for Respondent.

Date of hearing : Ist November,.1982.

ABAID ULILAH KHAN, J.‑‑This appeal calls in question the validity of the order of the learned Special Judge (Banking) Lahore, dated the 6th July; 1982, returning the plaint of the suit filed by the appellant for lack of jurisdiction.

2, H. M. Ahmad Riaz, appellant established a letter of credit with the National Bank of Pakistan, Main Branch, Lahore, respondent, in connection with import and export business. As a. result of transaction touching the letter of credit the respondent created against the appellant a loan of Rs. 7,15,310 whose ' authenticity the latter disputed. He maintained that the respondent's claim. was in. excess of Rs. 2,20,755. He instituted suit in the Special Court constituted under the Banking Companies (Recovery of‑Loans) Ordinance, 1979 (XIX of 1979), for injuucting the respondent from selling his goods for the realization of the aforementioned amount of Rs. 2,20,755 plus interest thereon and in the alternative asked for the refund of his money received by the respondent. He fixed value of the suit for the purposes of court‑fee and jurisdiction a Rs. 200. The learned Special Judge was mainly influenced by the small amount of valuation of the cause to think that the suit was not within the ambit of his pecuniary jurisdiction. Therefore, he ordered the return of the plaint for presenting it to the Court having jurisdiction,, namely, the ordinary Civil Court.

3. Admittedly the outstanding amount of loan against the appellant exceeds one lac rupees and his claim is in respect and arises out of such loan, Therefore, in face of provisions of sections 6 (1) (a), 2 (a) and (4) of the Banking Companies Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, the Special Court had exclusive jurisdiction to try and dispose of the suit while exercising powers vested in a Civil Court. The view of the learned Special Judge to the contrary is not endorsed by law. The appeal is consequently accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to the learned Special Court for trial and disposal according to law. The costs of this appeal will be costs in the suit.

K. M, A. Appeal allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.