' SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.---This Civil Petition for leave to appeal has been filed against Sindh High court judgment, dated 9-3-2005.
2. Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance o 3CD Circular No,6 of 1990 issued by State Bank of Pakistan, Clause 5 of which permits a bank to disclose/intimate the liability of any party/debtor to respondent No,3, respondent No,4 intimated the liability of the petitioner. It was the case of the petitioner that while respondent No,4 intimated the liability of petitioner outstanding against it, it should have also intimated its liability towards the petitioner by way of counter claim which would have presented true picture of the liabilities of both the parties before respondent No,3. Such course would not have allowed respondent No,3 to take a one sided view against the petitioner and intimate all the banks/financial institutions working under respondent No,2 State Bank of Pakistan of the fact that the petitioner was a defaulter as a result of which all of them refused/stopped financial facility to the petitioner causing in grave and serious damage to his business.
3. For deciding this petition it will the appropriate to reproduce relevant portion of the High Court judgment dealing with object/purpose of Circular No,6 as well as the objection relative to supply/one sided information of outstanding debt of the petitioner without disclosing the counter claim of the petitioner. Relevant portions on page 21 of the High Court order are as under:- "We have considered the above submissions of the learned counsel and examined the Circular No,6. A perusal of the earlier clauses of this circular reveals that the respondent No,4 developed a mechanism for collecting information through the respondent No,3 from all the banks/NBF is pertaining to their customers and their financial status available with them. The purpose seems to be that from one source i,e, the respondent No,3 any financial institution may in its turn collect information about the financial status of a customer/their customer with other banks enabling them to decide the course of their future business transactions with them. This mechanism saves the financial institutions falling prey to the defaulters. The exercise is only aimed at to conduct transparent business and to provide the financial institutions who are holding the depositors funds, 'to look before they leap' with regard to financial commitment. The practice is stated to be in existence in a number of countries."
"We agree with Mr. Akhtar that the circular only requires the financial institutions to intimate to the respondent No,3 about default and liabilities of the borrower vis-a-vis bank and not vice versa. It cannot, therefore, be said that while respondent No,4 informing about the financial status of the petitioner to the respondent No,3 has violated any provisions thereof."
4. From a bare perusal of the above paragraphs reproduced from the judgment of Sindh High Court, it is crystal clear that the learned Judges of the Division Bench had dismissed the constitutional petition after taking into consideration all the material questions of fact and law, application of mind and observing that Circular No,6 did not encroach upon any of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. With regard to the contention that one sided information/intimation was given, it was observed that the same was the requirement of the circular and no illegality or irregularity was committed by respondent No,4 in doing so.
5. For the foregoing facts, reasons, and discussion this petition is found to be without any substance Accordingly the same is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.