MUHAMMAD YAMIN & COMANY Versus UNITED BANK LIMITED

1. The petitioner has filed this petition under section 12 C.P.C. for setting aside the judgment and decree passed against the order in Suit No.378/1977 filed by United Bank Limited. The main ground for seeking this relief is that without her knowledge and permission Mr. Khalid Athar (not Mr. Khalid Anwar as stated in the application) appeared and filed Vakalatnama. He did not put up any defence, nor informed the petitioner and pleaded no instruction due to which the case proceeded in her absence and the plaintiff managed to obtain the decree through fraud and misrepresentation. When she received a notice from the Civil Judge she being illiterate woman engaged Mr. Sibghatullah Hamid Advocate who informed him that the decree has already been passed. She stated that she has never given any document to the plaintiff No.l, she has not signed any document, mortgage or guarantee in respect of the loan advanced by the Bank. She is an illiterate lady and the documents have been managed. From the petition it seems that the main ground is that the petitioner/ defendant had not engaged .Mr. Khalid Athar as her Advocate. Considering the nature of controversy between the parties I called Mr. Khalid Athar, Advocate as a Court witness and the petitioner/defendant was also directed to be present in Court. The statement of Mr. Khalid Athar was recorded in which he clearly stated that he recognises the petitioner /defendant who was present in Court. He further stated that she had come with one person, engaged him and signed the Vakalatnama which he filed in Court. After that she did not turn tip and therefore, he reported no instruction. I have no reason to disbelieve the statement of Mr. Khalid Athsr. In the face of this evidence, the petitioner /defendant case falls to the ground. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

2. M.Z.S/U‑48/K Application dismissed