Pakistan Case Law← Search
2005 CLD 1603

Syed KHALID HASSAN and another vs NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN and 12

Citation2005 CLD 1603
CourtLahore High Court
Judge(s)Jawwad S. Khawaja, Mian Saqib Nisar
ResultAppeal allowed.

JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---This appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 15-6-1999 passed by the learned Banking Court No.IV, Lahore. The facts of this case are straightforward.

National Bank of Pakistan (respondent No.1) filed a suit against the appellants and others to recover a sum of Rs.7,562,949.35. The suit was based on a finance facility advanced by the respondent-Bank to Messrs Pearl Paper Products (Pvt.) Ltd., (defendant/respondent No.2) as principal debtor. The appellants/defendants were impleaded as guarantors on the basis of personal guarantees executed by them to secure the liability of the aforesaid principal debtor.

2. This appeal was filed by Syed Khalid Hassan and Syed Shahid Hassan appellants/defendants. By means of an order passed today on an application under Order 1. rule 10. C.P.C. we have allowed transposition of the names of Mehmoodul-Hassan and Mrs. Farhat Mehmood (who were arrayed as respondents Nos.11 and 12 in this appeal) as appellants.

3. The case of the appellants is that they have not issued any personal guarantees to secure the liability owed to the respondent-Bank by Messrs Pearl Paper Products (Pvt.) Ltd. This fact is not denied by learned counsel for the Bank. In these circumstances, we arc not in any doubt that the appellants. namely, Syed Khalid Hassan. Syed Shahid Hassan, Mehmood-ul-Hassan and Mrs. Farhat Mehmood had raised a serious and bona fide defence to the suit filed by the respondent- Bank. As such, their application seeking leave to appear and defend could not have been dismissed. Consequently. this appeal is allowed and the forenamed appellants are allowed leave to defend the suit filed by the respondent-Bank. They shall within fifteen days file their written statements before the Banking Court which shall proceed in the matter as a regular long cause in respect of the four appellants named above.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search