' This appeal has arisen out of the orders passed by learned Single Judge in Chamber on 11-4-1995 on Report No,308 and C.M. No,207-L-95 in C.O. No,45/90. Taj Company Limited, under liquidation, had obtained a loan of Rs,35,00,000 from United Bank Limited. A decision was taken by Pakistan Banking Council in its meeting on 23-1-1992 to waive the interest on the said loan which was conveyed vide letter dated 10-2-1992. The operative part of the letter reads:-- "The MCBs' Presidents have decided that your request to waive off the interest so far accrued without any mark-up within a maximum period of 12 years may be acceded to."
' Mr. Muhammad Nazar Khan, Advocate/Member, Board of Administrators Taj Company had informed the learned Single Judge that the appellant had been paid Rs,22,00,000 by the said Company in the following break-up:--
(a) Rs,10,00,000 paid on 8-4-1990.
(b) Rs,12,00,000 paid on 5-8-1990 ' The Company had issued a cheque for the remaining amount of Rs,13,00,000 but the appellant bank declined to accept that cheque and also refused to release the documents of title.
2. The petition C.M. No,210-L-95 was moved by the bank before the learned Single Judge on the ground that there being yet another decision of Pakistan Banking Council in the following words:-- "It may please be noted that the MCBs President's above decision does not relate to the interest already paid by the borrower-Company as the same has already been accounted for in the income of the Bank for relevant years."
' The bank was entitled to recover outstanding as the previous amount paid by Taj Company during the year 1990 was to be taken as a payment towards the interest, as directed under letter dated 12-2-1990.
3. The learned Single Judge in Chamber held that the earlier decision communicated vide letter dated 10-2-1992 was unqualified as it mentioned that the entire interest accrued was waived without any qualification or reservation and that the amount earlier paid shall not fall within the purview of said decision. Earlier decision being unqualified it was held that the same amounted to waiver of the entire interest accrued or which was to be accrued in future whether already adjusted or not. The decision of waiver having already been conveyed and acted upon could not be modified or altered unilaterally; and as such, the decision agitated by the appellant dated 1-2- 1995 was of no help and could not be allowed to operate to the prejudice of Taj Company.
4. The appellant bank was directed to receive the proceeds of cheque issued by Taj Company for an amount of Rs,13,00,000 and accept the said, amount which would satisfy outstanding of principal amount of loan. The appellant was further directed, to return the title deeds within 15 days thereof.
5. Entirely a new plea has been taken in the present appeal by the appellant. It has been submitted that the Company had executed a promissory note in the sum of Rs,72,17,860 which was outstanding on 5-4-1990 and according to them the said promissory note was with consideration and the same could only be taken as the principal loan. We are afraid, we cannot place a different meaning on promissory note. The promissory note is always for a consideration received. The consideration received by Taj Company as on 11-4-1984 was Rs,35,00,000 and the amount of Rs,72,17,860 as on 8-4-1990 was the balance of total outstanding in the said account after an amount of Rs,10,00,000 was paid by the Company. The outstanding balance can never be considered as a consideration for a promissory note and we hold that promissory note, copy of which has been placed on file of the appeal, was without consideration and at the most could be taken without prejudice to the rights of the Company, as an acknowledgement of the outstanding in the books of the appellant, prima facie, barred by time.
6. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in Chamber was very clear and all the submissions made by the appellant had been taken note of. We are in absolute agreement with the impugned order and dismiss the present appeal in limine.