' C.M. No, 1-C of 200.1 ' Although the aforenoted C.M. Is fixed for today, yet at the request of the learned counsel for both the parties, the main appeal as well as C.M. No, 2-C of 2001, are taken up. C.M. Stands disposed of.
' C.M. No, 2-C of 2001 ' For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. C.M. Stands disposed of.
' MAIN CASE ' Present first appeal, filed by the appellant/ judgment-debtor, proceeds against the judgment and decree, dated 24-5-2001, whereby the learned Judge Banking Court, Faisalabad, passed a decree for the recovery of Rs,3,14,634, with mark-up at the rate of 13,50 per annum, commencing from 31- 12-2000, till the full and final realization of the decretal amount, in favour of the respondent-Bank and against the appellant, with costs.
2. Briefly stated the facts, necessary for the decision of the present appeal, are that the respondent-bank filed a suit for the recovery of Rs,7,21,928, as on 31-5-1993, against the appellant, before the then Banking Tribunal (since- defunct), who issued show-cause notice to the appellant, as required under section 6(2) of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 (since repealed), wherein the appellant raised certain legal and factual objections. However, the learned Banking Tribunal, after hearing the parties and upon the rejection of the plea taken up by the appellant, passed a decree for the recovery of Rs,3,14,634 with mark-up and costs, as noted above, vide judgment and decree, dated 24-5-2001, hence, the present appeal.
3. After arguing.The matter at some length, the learned counsel for the respondent-bank has submitted that he has no objection, in case the suit is remanded to the learned Banking Court, after setting aside the impugned judgment and decree for its decision afresh. Learned counsel for the appellant has readily agreed to this course of action.
4. In view of the consensus, arrived at between the learned counsel of the parties, as noted above, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and decree, dated 24-5-2001, is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. The result would be that the suit, filed by the respondent- bank, titled "A.D.B.P. v. Umer Hayat", shall be deemed to be pending before the learned Banking Court-II, Faisalabad, who shall decide the same after treating the reply to the show-cause notice, filed by the appellant before the then Banking Tribunal, as application for leave to defend the suit, after hearing the parties and, of course, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the receipt of this order, even if he has to undertake day-to-day proceedings.
' Office is directed to immediately transmit the record to the learned Banking Court.