' Principal contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants, while relying upon entries in the passport of Nusrat Medhi Chaudhry, appellant No,2, is that on the date of alleged execution, i,e, 15-1-1998, of certain documents, attributed to the appellants and said to have been executed on 15-1-1998 by the appellant No,2 on behalf of appellant No,1, the Chief Executive of the Company namely Nusrat Mehdi Chaudhry, appellant No,2, was not present in Pakistan, therefore, his execution or affixing his signatures on the said documents are out of question, as such, those documents cannot be made basis of the claim of the respondent-Bank. However, when questioned about the quantum of outstanding amount against the appellants, the reply of the learned counsel is that although appellants owe certain amounts to the respondent-Bank, yet that is subject to the final determination and the learned Banking Court, without undertaking the said exercise, has passed the impugned order only on the basis of the documents, purportedly, executed by appellant No,2 on 15-1-1998. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank, while relying upon resolution dated 12-12-1997, passed in the presence of Muhammad Sharif and Mst. Qaisera Mehdi, the Directors, has submitted that the said two persons, appellants Nos: 3 and 4, have also executed the documents, on 15-1-1998, alongwith appellant No,2 and the signatures of the said two Directors have not been denied, therefore, the documents have rightly been relied upon for passing the impugned judgment and decree. However, both the learned counsel have agreed that the amounts outstanding against the appellants cannot ' be determined without having in-depth examination of the record of the case.
2. After arguing the matter at length, the learned counsel for the parties have consented that the appeal may be disposed of in the following terms:--
(i) The impugned judgment and decree dated 1-1-2003 is set aside.
'(ii) The appellant's application for the grant of leave to defend the suit is partly allowed and the leave is granted only to the extent as to how much amount is due against the appellants.
(iii) That consequent to the above, the respondent's suit for recovery shall deem to be pending before the learned Banking Court, who shall adjudicate upon the suit and determine the outstanding amount against the appellants after recording the evidence of the parties, hearing them and of course in accordance with law.
(iv) That in consideration of the above, the appellants have abandoned/relinquished the aforenoted principal stance of the appellants with the understanding that the said plea will not be agitated/pressed before the learned Banking Court at the time of determination of the "amount due".
(v) The learned Banking Court shall decide the suit, as noted above, within a period of three months from today, even if it has to undertake day to day proceedings.
3. Present appeal stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.