' This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by learned Banking Court No,1 Karachi whereby an application under section 12 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances)
Ordinance, 2001 in Modaraba Suit No,14 of 2007 was dismissed and suit against the appellant was decreed. The appellant No,1 is principal borrower whereas appellant No,2 and respondent No,2 stood guarantors of the finances advance by the respondent No,1 ' Succinctly the facts leading to the case are that Messrs Al-Zamin leasing Modaraba had advanced the loan finance facility to the appellant No,1 whereas appellant No,2 had acted as guarantors by virtue of guarantee executed in favour of the respondent No,
1. Finance facility was provided for the purchase of five stock of 12-units buffaloes, later second finance facility was granted for the 12-units buffaloes, for total consideration of Rs,4,80,000. As per lease agreement monthly rentals Rs,41,161,00 per month were agreed for one year and remaining 24 instalments were directed to be paid in two years. The guarantors executed the guarantees in favour of the respondent No,
1. On account of default by the principal, the leasing company has proceeded to file the suit for recovery.
' Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the impugned judgment is not in conformity with law as the statement of accounts required to be annexed along with plaint under section 9(2) was not filed thereby mandatory requirement of the law was frustrated. It is next urged that the service of the summonses was effected upon the appellants and the respondent No,2 on 10th July, 2007 therefore, the period for filing of the application for leave to defend has commenced on the said date, the learned Banking Judge without taking into consideration the relevant provisions of law had proceeded to dismiss the application for leave to defend the suit.
' Ms. Sumeera Usto learned counsel for respondent No,1 has contended that the appellants on account of their own acts and deeds are estopped from challenging the vires of impugned judgment, cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate after their application for leave to defend was dismissed. It is next urged that the summonses were published in daily "JANG" and daily "DAWN" after the suit was filed in the Banking Court on 16-6-2007, the appellants were required to file written statement/leave to defend application on/or before 19th July, 2007 as they have themselves collected the notices from the Banking Court on 10th July, 2007, they have proceeded to file application for leave to defend under section 12 of the Ordinance, 2001. In support of the above contention reliance has been placed on the cases of Shaikh Muhammad Rafiq v.
United Bank Ltd. And others 1997 SCM R 1149, Messrs Nasir Traders and 3 others v. Habib Bank Ltd PLJ 1994 Peshawar 233, Messrs Majeed Enterprises and others v. Messrs United Bank Ltd. 1994 CLC 2292, Messrs O.K. Agencies v. Chief Controller and others 2000 YLR 1867.
' We have considered the arguments advanced at bar. At this stage, it would be convenient to reproduce a text of sections 9(5) and 10(2) of the Ordinance, herein below in extenso: -- "9. Procedure of Banking Court."
(1)-------- (2)--------- (3)--------- (4)---------
(5) On a plaint being presented to the Banking Court, summons in Form No,4 in Appendix 'B' to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908) or in such other form as may, from time to time, be prescribed by rules, shall be served on the defendant through the bailiff or process server of the Banking Court, by registered post acknowledge due, by courier and by publication in one English language and one Urdu language daily newspaper, and service duly effected in any one of the aforesaid modes shalt be deemed to be Valid service for purposes of this Ordinance. In the case of service of the summons through the bailiff or process server, a copy of the plaint shall be attached therewith and in all the cases the defendant shall be entitled to obtain a copy of the plaint from the office of the Banking Court without making a written application but against due acknowledgment.
The banking Court shall ensure that the publication of summons takes place in newspapers with a wide circulation within its territorial limits."
10. Leave to defend. (1)-----
(2) The defendant shall file the application of leave to defend through publication in the newspapers; the Banking Court may extend the time for filing an application for leave to defend if satisfied that the defendant did not have knowledge thereof."
It is a golden rule of interpretation of law that the words used by the legislature are to be read and understood in plain and ordinary meanings. The bear reading of section 9(5) visualizes that after the plaint has been presented in the Banking Court summonses shall be served upon the defendant through bailiff or process server, by registered post acknowledgement due, by courier and by publication in one English language and one Urdu language daily newspapers and service duly effected in any one of the aforesaid modes shall be deemed to be valid service for the purpose of this Ordinance. Section 10(2) of the Ordinance provides that the defendant shall file the application for leave to defend within thirty days of the date of first service by any one of the modes laid down in section 9(5). The object of the Ordinance was to provide machinery for expeditious recovery of the money. Admittedly the appellants and respondent No,2 were served through publication in daily Jang and daily Dawn on 16th June, 2007 while the notices were received by the appellants from the Banking Court on 10th July, 2007 written statement/ application for leave to defend ought to have been filed within thirty days viz. On/or before 19th July, 2007. From the plain reading of the aforementioned provisions of the law we are of the considered view that the impugned judgment does not call for interference at this stage.
Consequently Ist Appeal No,17 of 2008 on the basis of what has been discussed about was dismissed on 23-10-2008 by a short order; these are the reasons for the same.