' ARSHAD MAHMOOD, J.---Through this constitutional petition Safdar Noor Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factory Kehrore Pacca seeks setting aside of orders, dated 9-3-2007 and 14-3-2007 passed by the learned executing Court.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent instituted a suit or recovery of Rs,1,50,000 (rupees one lac fifty thousand only) on the basis of cheques against the petitioner under Order XXXVII Rule 2, C.P.C. Before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Kehrore Pacca, District Lodhran which was decreed against the petitioner ex parte vide judgment and decree, dated 15-10-2004.
Application of the petitioner seeking setting aside of ex parte decree was dismissed. The respondent filed execution petition. Petitioner submitted an application for making A the installments of the decretal amount. Vide order, dated 9-3-2007 the learned executing Court accepted the application for installment of decretal amount with the condition that the petitioner shall pay Rs,50,000 rupees fifty thousand only) till next date of hearing i.e, 13-3-2007 and if he fails to pay the same then the application filed by the petitioner for installment of the decretal amount shall be deemed to be dismissed and due to non-deposit of Rs,50,000 the learned executing Court dismissed the application of the petitioner and issued warrant of arrest of the petitioner and his surety vide order, dated 14-3-2007. Hence this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition submits that the impugned orders are against law, facts and merits of the case. Learned counsel argued with vehemence that according to section 11 of the West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960 the learned Executing Court was under obligation to pass an order that the decretal amount shall be paid in such number of installments and on such date and subject to such conditions as being according to the circumstances of the judgment debtor and the amount of decree.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand have opposed this petition and supported the impugned orders,
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
6. Petitioner factory is trying to take shelter under the West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960. According to the definition of debt as provided in section 2 clause (b) of the Ordinance, 1960, the debt does not include the debts incurred for the purposes of trade. Perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that partiers had common business of cotton, therefore, the loan was advanced in connection with trade. Thus the petitioner cannot claim benefit of the provisions of the Ordinance, 1960. Resultantly this petition has no force and is accordingly dismissed.