Find a Lawyer

HABIB BANK LTD. versus INAMUR REHMAN

Code of Conduct 1908 Section 26 Law of Martyrs (10 of 1984), Article 118 The plaintiff's case for collection of money spent on furniture, furnishings and premises was that the defendant was the managing director of the bank, after which the plaintiff's bank I was merged. The merger bank funds were used for furniture, furnishings and office equipment that was being used by the defendant-owned firm / defendants and it was said that the money was not refunded - this was the case. That the premises were being used by the board. Prior to the merger, there was a stipulation between the directors and the parties of the merger that the bank would use such premises without paying any rent, paying the license fee for a premium to pay to the defendants. And considering it, they will renovate the premises. The fact is that the defendant's witness also believed that the plaintiff's bank could not produce any document to prove that the amount claimed was paid to the firm, so the covered plaintiff could prove such. I failed that the defendant was due to any amount by the plaintiff the suit was dismissed list of advocates from Makran lawyer