Section 9 Bankers Books Evidence Act (XVIII of 1891) Section 2 (8) and 4 Suite Account Recovery Statement Certificate Account Defendants' Request for Leave was dismissed by Plaintiff Bank did not claim Bankers The correct statement of the account under the Box Avoidance Act, 1891 and the Financial Institutions (Restoration of Finance) Ordinance, 2001, in this case the statement appeared in a white paper typed form, incomplete, outlined and by the principal accountant or manager. Unsubscribed and did not meet the requirements of Section 9 (2) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance 2001 and the Banker Book Asudnt Act section 1981, 2 (8), and the 4 account was not eligible as a plaintiff bank source filed banker Xbox ayuydysn Act account to the account of 1891 and did not have antyyr details. During the tax period, no date and details were disclosed in relation to the period between the approval of the financing and the payment, the date of payment of the dues and the markup compensation in the transaction between the plaintiff bank and the defendants. The present case was also invalid and was accepted by the plaintiff's bank counsel, rather than the principal accountant or manager of the bank, under section 2 (8) of the Bank Books Evidence Act, 1891. The cover was set aside. , And the case was remanded to the Banking Court to decide on the defendant's request for leave and to re-present the case in accordance with legal proceedings and observe that the plaintiff's bank account statement Can have the freedom to file and respondents
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
