MUHAMMAD AKRAM (Deceased) vs ALLIED BANK LIMITED Ss — 2024 CLD 1444 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.

MUHAMMAD AKRAM (Deceased) VS ALLIED BANK LIMITED Ss.10(5)(6) & 22---Suit for recovery filed by Bank---Petition for leave to appear and defend---Requirements---Suit was decreed in favour of plaintiff / Bank holding defend that no substantial question of law was raised by the defendant /customer in his petition for leave to appear of defend---Defendant/judgment-debtor preferred appeal against the decree, however, he died during the pendency of the appeal and legal heirs of deceased customer/judgment-debtor (appellants) pursued the case before the Appellate / High Court---Plea of the appellants was that an opportunity be granted to them to contest the case by allowing leave to defend---Validity---Appellants remained unsuccessful to show the Court any substantial question of law having been raised through the petition for leave to appear and defend, which required trial through recording of evidence---Record revealed that the factum of renewal/ extension of finance facility upon request of the deceased was established---No document was indicated to show adjustment of finance facility of 2003-04 ; conversely, respondent / Bank established withdrawal of funds for adjusting overdue liabilities with funds extended through finance facility-in-question---Funds were made available and withdrawn through cheque which details were mentioned in relevant para of the plaint but the same were not explicitly rebutted in the leave application---It was established that amounts overdue were adjusted and working capital was made available for one year, at the request of predecessor of the appellants--- Finance and security documents were executed and acted upon--- Respondent / Bank had provided statement of account for the finance facility 2003-04 and 2005-06, wherein no objection was raised with respect to any entry / entries therein---In yet another para of the plaint, the respondent / Bank disclosed factum of a (previous) suit having been instituted by the Customer against the financial institution, which fact was neither denied nor any document/order was referred for disputing factum of institution of suit and effect of its dismissal---Dismissal of suit otherwise manifested acquiescence on the part of deceased qua legitimacy of the claim---Predecessor of the appellants was an obvious beneficiary of the finance facility, extended and availed---Suit had been instituted by the authorized officers and one of the signatories was identified as Branch Manager---Statement of accounts met the requirements of law---Thus, plea of the appellants (that opportunity be granted to them being legal heirs of the deceased to contest) was misconceived, especially in the context of absence of all substantial question of law and fact raised in the application for leave to defend the suit---Ambiguous objections raised otherwise called for no serious attention---Requirements in terms of S.10(5)(6) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 were not met---No illegality, error or defect was found in the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Banking Court---Appeal being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD AKRAM (Deceased) vs ALLIED BANK LIMITED Ss — 2024 CLD 1444 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLD