' SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.---Respondent No,1 herien filed a suit for recovery of money under section 12 of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979 against respondent No,2, who is borrower, and the petitioner, who is guarantor. Since the defendants in the suit were not served initially, the suit was decreed ex parte and after acquiring knowledge during execution proceedings application was filed for setting aside ex parte decree, which was dismissed. A regular first appeal was filed in the High Court by both the judgment-debtors, who are brothers inter se, and interim order was passed on 19-9-1994 allowing borrower Raja Muhammad Ashraf to deposit Rs,100,000 within two months and to approach the bank for remission of interest. No objection was raised to this order by the counsel of the bank and for the further proceedings the hearing was adjourned.
Finally the appeal was dismissed with costs vide the impugned order on the ground that undertaking given to the Court to deposit Rs,I0,000 within two months was not complied with.
2. Contention is raised that if borrower did not comply with the direction how appeal of guarantor could be dismissed on the ground as stated above particularly when requirements contemplated under section 12(5) of the said Ordinance had been complied with. Leave is granted to examine whether the High Court has erred in passing the order in view of the contention mentioned above. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.