' MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---Respondent No,1 filed a suit for recovery, inter alia against the appellant and respondents Nos.2 and 3, before the Civil Court in the year 1968; this suit after contest was dismissed by the Court on 1-3-1986; appeal filed by ,respondent No,1, succeeded on 11-4-1989 and it was held by the Court of Appeal that because of promulgation of Ordinance No,XXIX of 1979, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction, therefore, the matter was remanded to the Civil Court for its transfer to the Special Court constituted under Ordinance No,XXIX of 1979. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties as the issues had already been framed and evidence was completed before the Civil Court, thus on transfer of the matter to the Banking Court, the parties made statement to rely upon the same evidence. Anyhow, the learned Banking Court, after hearing the arguments, had allowed the suit through the judgment and decree dated 17-3-1999.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant at the very outset, has pointed out that as there are number of factual issues, but the learned Court below has passed very sketchy judgment, which does not show proper application of mind to the evidence on the record. Such is the position with regard to the legal question as well.
3. Vide order dated 18-2-2002, respondents Nos.2 and 3 were proceeded ex parte and on the last date of hearing, representative of respondent No, 1 was present, who sought time to engage a counsel and the date was fixed in his presence; as today none represents respondent No,1, therefore, the said respondent is also proceeded ex parte.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we find that the judgment of the Court below does not fulfil the requirement of judicial adjudication; the judgment is absolutely sketchy and the issue on facts and law have not been disposed of on the basis of the evidence on the record and the law applicable thereto, resultantly, such judgment and decree cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside, therefore, by allowing this appeal, we remand the case to the learned Banking Court, for re-writing of the judgment, after hearing the parties.