HABIB BANK LIMITED vs MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Ss — 2022 CLD 1013 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2022 CLD 1013 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2022
Reporter: CLD
Parties: HABIB BANK LIMITED vs MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Ss
Subject matter: Civil
Provisions referred to: S. 151; Limitation Act (IX of 1908); Limitation Act

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

HABIB BANK LIMITED VS MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Ss. 9, 10 & 22---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 181---Suit for recovery of finance---Suit dismissed for absence of plaintiff---Restoration---Date not fixed for hearing---Suit filed by appellant/Bank was dismissed due to its absence on the date it was fixed for attendance of respondents/defendants---Validity---Suit could not be dismissed, if date was not for hearing---Such dismissal had no legal effect and there was no limitation to run against such order, which was void, a nullity and not permissible---Such order of dismissal could be set aside by invoking provision of S. 151 C.P.C.---No limitation provided elsewhere in Limitation Act, 1908 or under S. 151, C.P.C., therefore, in the light of Art. 181 of Limitation Act, 1908, period of three years was available for such type of applications---Appellant/Bank moved application for restoration of the suit and condonation of delay which was supported by affidavit and there was no reason for Banking Court to disbelieve that affidavit---Law favours adjudication on merits and dismissal for non-prosecution should be an exception and not a rule---Court was not to be very strict in such regard---Litigant was not to be deprived of hearing unless there has been something equivalent to misconduct or gross negligence on his part---High Court set aside the order passed by Banking Court as there was no such finding against appellant/ Bank and suit was restored---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLD

2022 CLD 1051 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIMADINA BREEDING (PVT.) LIMITED VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY S. 1---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Envi…
2022 CLD 626 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHISINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY VS DIAMOND RESIDENCY through Owner/ Chief Executive Officer Ss. 17 & 1---Initial environmental examina…
2022 CLD 502 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIARIF BELGAUMI VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (SEPA) S. 17---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Environmental…
2022 CLD 233 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIRAFHAN MAIZE PRODUCTS COMPANY LTD. VS DIRECTOR GENERAL, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH Ss. 11, 13 & 14---Prohibition o…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED S. 5(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963 [since repe…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED Ss. 6, 8(a) & 10(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English