1. SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.---In the suit for permanent and mandatory injunction with consequential relief filed by the appellants, application for grant of leave to defend was filed by the respondent/corporation. While hearing and deciding the said application the learned Banking Court proceeded to reject the plaint on 10-5-2002 under Order VII, rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which has been appealed against under section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001.
2. ' The prime contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the plaint could not be rejected at this stage and in the manner it has been done. The learned counsel for the respondent/corporation points out that since the appellants had obtained loan of Rs,3,00,000 out of which only paltry sum was returned, he has no cause of action to that extent.
3. ' Though loan worth Rs,3,00,000 was obtained by the appellants from the respondent/corporation, out of which some was paid also, yet coercive process for much higher amount was initiated against them (the borrower and the guarantor), which pushed them to institute the abovementioned suit.
4. On consideration of the matter, we are inclined to dispose of this appeal in the manner that the appellants will pay the balance principal amount of loan within two months and if so done the order passed by the Banking Court rejecting the plaint will stand set aside. In that case, the application filed by the respondent/corporation for leave to defend will stand accepted unconditionally whereafter the Banking Court will proceed to decide the suit in accordance with law.