Messrs TERMIZI OIL INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. through Director and 3 others vs INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN through Senior Vice President
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a money decree passed by a Banking Court in favor of the Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan against the petitioners, which was subsequently confirmed by the Lahore High Court. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the suit filed by the respondent-Bank was maintainable, given the petitioners' contention that the officer who instituted the suit, a Senior Vice-President, lacked the requisite authorization to act on behalf of the Bank. Upon review, the Supreme Court examined the evidence, specifically a notification dated 13-9-1974 (Exh.P.12) issued by the Bank's Board of Directors. This notification expressly authorized officers holding the rank of Senior Vice-President to institute legal proceedings on behalf of the institution. Finding no merit in the petitioners' challenge to this authorization, the Court upheld the validity of the impugned judgment and decree. The Court affirmed that where a corporate entity has formally empowered specific officers through a board resolution or notification to initiate litigation, such suits are legally competent and maintainable.
- Can a suit filed by a bank officer be maintained if the officer's authority to institute the suit is challenged?
- Does a board notification authorizing officers of a specific rank to institute suits satisfy the requirement for legal authorization?
ORDER
KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J.---On a suit brought by the respondent-Bank, the Banking Court passed a money decree in the sum of Rs.10.6787 million as "of 30-9-1995 along with other charges etc. Till total realization of the Banks dues". On appeal the Lahore High Court, confirmed the decree on 18-4-2005 against which judgment and decree the petitioner seeks leave to appeal.
2. The only ground urged the learned counsel is that the suit was tiled by the Bank through a person who was not authorized to file the same. He has explained that suit was filed through Mr. Zafar Hameed, Senior Vice-President, Regional Office, Lahore, who had not been authorized to file the suit in the name and on behalf of the Bank.
3. The High Court has relied on Exh.P.12, a Notification dated 13-9-1974 bearing No. EST/110/1292/72, wherein the Board of Directors of respondent-Bank authorized the officers of the rank of Senior Vice-President to institute the suit. We see no reason to disagree with the High Court on this point.
No argument whatsoever has been addressed by the learned counsel against notification Exh.P.12.
4. The impugned judgment and decree is perfectly valid. We find this petition to be without merit and dismiss the same. Leave is refused. 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.