1. ' MAQBOOL BAQAR, J.--- Mr. Salim Thepdawala requests for an adjournment. He submits that in view of the 18th Amendment, the question that whether the procedure provided under the present Banking Ordinance is in consonance with the concept of fair trial and due process as enunciated through the said Amendment, is under consideration by a Division Bench of this court and such petition is being heard on day to day basis. He, therefore, requests that the hearing in the present case may be adjourned till such time the Division Bench decides as to whether the procedure of the present proceedings meets the above criteria or not. Mr. Saim Hashmi, Advocate vehemently opposes the request. He submits that since the defendant has in para-28 of its application under section 10 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 clearly admitted its liability towards the plaintiff in the sum of Rs,406,525,436, therefore, an interim decree at least to the extent of such amount may be granted. Mr. Salim Thepdawala, advocate submits that the amount as shown payable by the defendant, as noted above, does not pertain to the suit transactions. In response, Mr. Saim Hashmi, Advocate submits that the suit transactions are in continuity with the transactions in respect: whereof the defendant has admitted the above amount and, therefore, the plaintiffs claim in the suit shall be, reduced by Rs,406,525,436 in case such amount is paid by the defendant He, however, clarifies that: much of the remaining amount pertains to L/C transactions, wherein rollover cannot even be alleged.
2. The above being the position, 1 would, therefore, grant an interim decree in favour of the plaintiff for payment of an amount, of Rs,406,525,436 by the defendant to the plaintiff. Hearing in respect, of leave to defend application for the remaining amount is adjourned to 16-11-2010.