UNITED BANK LIMITED through Senior Vice President UBL, Karachi vs SHIRIMATI PUSHPA BAI S

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

UNITED BANK LIMITED through Senior Vice President UBL, Karachi VS SHIRIMATI PUSHPA BAI S.122---Insurance claim under bank-introduced accidental cover---Civil Court decree, execution of---Constitutional petition---Acceptance of execution, challenge to---Jurisdiction of Insurance Tribunal---Scope---Petitioner being a banking company and not an insurance company---Effect---Failure to take objection viz. limitation---Effect---Failure to challenge decree in revision---Effect upon challenge to execution---Executing court cannot travel beyond the decree---Principle---Briefly, respondent (widow) filed asuit seeking declaration and recovery of Rs.250,000/- (with 14% profit) against the petitioner bank under “UBL Aap Kay Tahafuz Saaiban” accidental cover for her deceased husband (account holder); bank accepted the policy but refused payment, alleging the claim was lodged beyond the 90-day period; Trial Court decreed the suit, petitioner bank's appeal was dismissed and no revision was filed; respondent/decree-holder filed execution which was accepted, leading to the institution of the present constitutional petition against execution orders---Held: It was for the first time that the petitioners had taken the plea that the present matter pertained to the insurance claim of the late husband of the respondent No.1 and fell within the exclusive domain of Insurance Tribunal constituted under Insurance Ordinance, 2000---Pleadings filed by the petitioners made it explicitly clear that no such ground was ever taken before Trial Court, Appellate Court and in the present petition---On the contrary, the claim of the respondent No. 1 was denied on the premise that same was time barred---The original judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court were not challenged under the revision proceedings available to the petitioners in terms of S. 115, C.P.C., wherein such legal questions could have been appropriately examined and settled---Non-filing of the revision application against the original judgment and decree set at rest the entire controversy between the parties, as the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below attained finality and became a closed and past transaction---The Executing Court could not examine the merits of the case; its sole function was to get the decree executed---The Executing Court as a settled principle of law could not go beyond the decree---Present petition apparently was filed to defeat the cause of justice and hamper the execution proceedings and to avoid the satisfaction of the decree---Moreover, Insurance Tribunal, as agitated by the petitioner, did not have jurisdiction in the matter since the petitioner was a banking company and not an insurance company---Findings of the courts below in execution proceedings did not suffer from any illegality or perversity requiring interference by the High Court under its supervisory and corrective jurisdiction---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

UNITED BANK LIMITED through Senior Vice President UBL, Karachi vs SHIRIMATI PUSHPA BAI S — 2026 CLD 589 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLD