1. MUSHIR ALAM, J.--- This is an application under Order .21, Rule 46 read with Rule 56, C.P.C: moved by the decree-holder for the attachment of the bank accounts mentioned therein. From the record it appears that the decree is based on an award dated 30.3.1989 which was made rule of the Court on 16.4.1999 and the amount of Rs.24,50,251 is claimed in the execution application.
2. Earlier application moved by the decree-holder could not be implemented as the office has reported that the property sought to be attached are large in number and cannot be stored as no such facility of storage of such goods is available.
3. On such reference being made the decree-holder has moved the listed application. Mr. Afzal Nabi, learned counsel, for the judgment-debtor could only contend that this application is not ' maintainable and that he has intimated the judgment-debtor but, he has received no further instructions in the matter.
4. The objection relating to the non-maintainability of the application on the face of it are not sustainable. The decree-holder is entitled to seek the attachment of any property of the judgment- debtor till the entire amount of the decree is satisfied. Mere failure/non-listing of the property at the time of making of execution application will not deprive him to enforce or claim the execution till it is satisfied In the circumstances I do not find any 'force in the arguments of he judgment-debtor. In the first instance the accounts listed at Serials "A' and "B" that are maintained with the U.B.L., Civic Centre Branch, Gulshan-e-lqbal, Karachi are directed to be attached to the extent of decretal amount. In the event of any shortfall the third account mentioned in Serial No."C" may then be attached till further orders.