' SYED ASGHAR RAIDER, J.---The defendants/ respondents applied to the plaintiff-Bank for a finance facility for purchase of a Tractor, Trolly and implements. The loan was sanctioned and the defendants/respondents disbursed the stated amount pursuant to execution of a formal agreement dated 26-2-1990 and after fulfilling procedural requirements, the defendants were required to liquidate the liability as contained in Clause 23 of the agreement, in equal, six monthly installments of Rs,29,610 (24,100 as Principal and 5510 as mark-up) in the period commencing 7-1- 1991 to 7-1-1998. The plaintiff-Bank alleged default and filed suit for recovery of Rs,5,37,125 despite notice, the defendants/respondents did not turn up, therefore, suit was decreed ex parte as prayed for. Later the defendants/respondents filed an application under section 12 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, along with payment of Rs,1,00,000 praying that ex parte judgment and decree be set aside. After contest, the application was allowed. Thereafter the respondents/ defendants filed PLA, the Banking Court decreed the suit of the appellant-Bank in the sum of Rs,4,44,150 (Principal as well as Mark-up), but stating that the liability stands liquidated by the defendant, therefore, appellant-Bank is not entitled to recover the said decretal amount. The appellant-Bank is aggrieved of this judgment and decree, hence the present appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that after granting leave, the Banking Court was required to frame issues of law and fact and thereafter record evidence and pass decree, if it so warranted, but this was not done, thus, proper procedure was not followed. He further submitted that due payments have not been made there is shortfall payment in the decretal amount.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment.
4. The finance facility availed is not in dispute, the terms and conditions contained therein also stand admitted. The payments made by the respondents are also not disputed. The impugned judgment reflects that the total amount due to the plaintiff/appellant-Bank was Rs,4,73,760 of which, the A respondents made payment of Rs,4,44,150. Therefore, they are obliged to pay a further sum of Rs,29,610 to the appellant-Bank. This appeal is therefore, partially allowed, and the decree is enhanced from Rs,4,44,150 to 4,73,760. Decree sheet be amended accordingly.