MCB BANK LIMITED vs MUSHTAQ AND COMPANY Ss — 2022 CLD 261 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MCB BANK LIMITED VS MUSHTAQ AND COMPANY Ss. 19, 9 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 48---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 3 & Art. 181---Procedure of Banking Court---Suit for recovery---Decree of Banking Court---Execution of decree with or without intervention of Banking Court---Nature of execution proceedings in Banking Cases---Applicability of limitation on execution proceedings under the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Scope---Appellant decree-holder Bank impugned order of Banking Court whereby its application for revival of execution proceedings was dismissed on ground that same was barred by limitation---Validity---Under S. 19 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, it was clear that decree-holder was empowered to adopt any means for realization of decree, with or without intervention of court and it was not possible that if decree-holder sought to satisfy decree without intervention of court, then doors were permanently closed for it adopt satisfaction of decree through intervention of court if the decree-holder was unable to materialize satisfaction of decree without intervention of court---Appellant decree-holder Bank had filed application for revival of execution proceedings which was within limitation prescribed by Art. 181 of Schedule to Limitation Act, 1908---Under Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, there existed no requirement for a decree-holder to file separate execution petition as it was duty of Banking Court itself to convert a suit into execution proceedings after decree---Application filed by appellant in present case, at most could be pursued to trigger machinery of court and start execution proceedings for realization of decree and thus such application could not be hit by law of limitation or S. 48 of C.P.C.---In the present case, decree remained unsatisfied and mortgaged property as a result could also not be redeemed, therefore impugned order left both parties remediless which could not be allowed---Impugned order was set aside, and execution proceedings were revived before Banking Court--- Appeal was allowed, accordingly.

MCB BANK LIMITED vs MUSHTAQ AND COMPANY Ss — 2022 CLD 261 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLD