MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. versus DEWAN SALMAN FIBRE LIMITED
Sections 305, 306 and 325 Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001), Court Roll of Section 4 and 9 Companies, 1997, R7 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), and VII, R11 Doing, Rejecting Effectiveness of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance, 2001 Scope Bank filed a motion petition before the Company Judge on the basis of default in payment of finance, the respondent company requested to dismiss the petition on this request. That the relationship between the bank and the company was customer. And the financial institution, therefore, the only remedy available to the bank was to file a recovery case before the Banking Court before the Section 4 of the Financial Affairs (Recovery) Ordinance, 2001, under the jurisdiction of the Company, the respondents Was to determine if it contained any provisions. The Ordinance of Companies, 1984, which conflicted with the provisions of the Financial Institutions (Finance Recovery) Ordinance, 2001, was complied with by the acquisition of financial institutions (Recovery of finance) Ordinance, 2001 Contradictory provisions of the Companies Ordinance. 1984, the jurisdiction of the 1984 Banking Court was limited to those matters which were within the premises of a bank company and if any company was able to pay the loan, then the order for collusion against it was approved. Can't be done, even if the company refuses to pay a particular lender, the direction is only This could have been approved when the court had established that the company was unable to pay its debts. A lender, whether it was a financial institution or not, had to file a lawsuit to recover its debt,
best advocate from Jaja Abasian lawyer
