' MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.---The appellant filed a suit for recovery of Rs,13,08,549.70 against the respondents. In the plaint, it was stated that the said amount is due on the basis of a Cash Finance Limit of Rupees one Million sanctioned in favour of respondents in terms stated in para.3 of the plaint. In the suit prayer was also made of recovery of Rs,2,61,709.94 as 20% liquidated damages.
Respondents Nos.1 to 3 filed a reply to the show-cause notice issued under section 6(2) of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984. The matter was heard. Pleas taken in the said reply were rejected and the suit was decreed for the said amount of Rs,13,08,549.70 vide a judgment and decree, dated 6-7-1992.
' The learned counsel contends that the liquidated damages as prayed for have not been granted while the decree-sheet does not mention the counsel fee. No one has turned up for the respondents who have since been served. They are accordingly proceeded against ex parte. We find that the only arrangement between the parties in the matter of said Cash Finance was disbursement of the amount by the appellant and its repayment by the respondents with agreed mark-up. The appellant itself worked out the total outstanding amount as Rs,13,08,549.70, as per the statement of account appended with plaint. We called upon the learned counsel to demonstrate as to on what legal or equitable premises is the claim for liquidated damages being made out. The learned counsel is unable to do so. Even otherwise, it is by now settled that the claim of liquidated damages is not entertainable. Reference may be made to a D.B. Judgment of this Court in the case of Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd., Faisalabad v. Messrs Aisha Garments and others 2001 M LD 1955.
3. So far as the matter of omission of the grant of counsel fee is concerned, this matter pertains to the costs. We find that the suit has been decreed with costs. Needless to state here that for the purposes of assessm ent of costs with reference to counsel fee, a Certificate has to be filed by the counsel for the plaintiff or for that matter of the defendant. There is no plea that such a certificate was filed. We have examined the plaint and of course, this memorandum of appeal and we do not find even this much as to the amount which is being claimed to be awarded on this account.
4. For all that has been discussed above, we do not find any force in this Regular First Appeal which is accordingly dismissed without any order as to the costs.