SUNNY PETROLEUM SERVICE through Proprietor (since deceased) through Legal Representatives vs NATIONAL BANK OF

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

SUNNY PETROLEUM SERVICE through Proprietor (since deceased) through Legal Representatives VS NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN Ss. 2(c) & 9---Claim against Insurance Company---Jurisdiction of Banking Court---Scope---Insurance policy availed by customer through Bank---Loss of stock due to fire set by mob---Bank / plaintiff, responsibility of---Scope---An insurance company is not a customer under S.2(c) of the Ordinance, 2001 and the Banking Court has no jurisdiction to entertain or adjudicate upon claim against insurance company under a finance agreement---In the present case, the appraisal of documents produced in evidence by the respondent (Bank / plaintiff) clearly reflected that appellants (customers / defendants) had availed the facility-in-question---It further established that the insurance policy was duly signed by the appellant nor did the appellant point out towards any clause in such policy which could possibly put the respondent /Bank under obligation to file a claim with the insurance company of any outstanding liability of the appellant in case of default---Even if such a clause did exist, the right of the Bank to claim the outstanding liability against its customer was duly protected under the Ordinance, 2001---The insurance policy was obtained in the name of the company of the appellant No.1 and the entire insurance policy documents were singed and the premium was also paid by the appellants---As per clause of insurance in the sanction advice it was the condition precedent that all the assets of the company and/or personal properties of the partners/directors be charged with the Bank as security for the payment/obligations of company until the facility was fully settled and the assets shall be insured with an insurance company acceptable to the Bank---However, such insurance was meant to cover the risks of fire---Notably, such insurance policy had been assigned in favour of respondent / Bank but nothing had been mentioned in the finance facility about the extinguishment of the liability of the appellants towards Bank on account of any loss, whether it was insured or not---Appellants had also failed to point out any such condition, either in the sanction or in the terms and conditions of the insurance policy which absolved them from discharging their liability of payment of outstanding amount to the respondent / Bank---In the circumstances it appeared that the condition of insurance of hypothecated stock goods was imposed only to doubly secure the liabilities of the Bank in addition to the execution of other security documents including the mortgage deed of the properties against the finance facility provided by the respondent / Bank---Appeal filed by customer / defendants, being merit less, was dismissed, in circumstances.

SUNNY PETROLEUM SERVICE through Proprietor (since deceased) through Legal Representatives vs NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2025 CLD 1539 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLD