MUHAMMAD MANZOOR vs NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN
This matter arises from a civil suit for the recovery of a loan filed by the respondent National Bank of Pakistan against the petitioner Muhammad Manzoor, which was decreed by the trial court, upheld in appeal by the Additional District Judge, and further dismissed in limine by the Lahore High Court. The core legal question concerns whether the respondent's recovery suit was barred by limitation. The Supreme Court held that the suit was within time because the limitation period was validly extended prior to its expiry through the execution of a mortgage deed and the subsequent signing of a Balance Account Slip by the petitioner acknowledging the outstanding debt. The key principle laid down is that the execution of a mortgage deed and the signing of a balance confirmation slip prior to the expiration of the original limitation period effectively extends limitation for filing a recovery suit.
- Does the execution of a mortgage deed prior to the expiry of the original limitation period extend the time for filing a recovery suit?
- Whether signing a Balance Account Slip effectively extends the period of limitation for the recovery of a loan?
- Can a debtor challenge a Balance Account Slip without producing evidence to disprove their signature?
ORDER
MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.--Facts giving rise to this petition are that respondent National Bank of Pakistan filed a suit against the petitioner Muhammad Manzoor for the recovery of Rs.24,899.60.
The suit was decreed by the Senior Civil Judge, Jhang. The petitioner filed an appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial Court which was heard by the learned Additional District Judge, who dismissed the same per order dated 13-7-1978. Thereafter the petitioner filed R .S. A. In the Lahore High Court which was dismissed in limine by a learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 27-9-1978.
2. Learned counsel's contention is that the suit of the respondent was time-barred explaining that the amount in dispute was made up of the loan of Rs.20,000 advanced to the petitioner and interest amounting to Rs.4,899.60 which had accrued thereon. The said loan was obtained by the petitioner on 14-10-1964 but the suit was brought on 28-7-1969, hence, the suit was filed after a period of three years and therefore, it was time-barred. All the three Courts below have repelled this contention of the learned counsel. We are unable to agree with this contention as well. Initially, the loan was advanced on 14-10-1964 but subsequently the petitioner renewed the loan on 31-12- 1966 by executing a mortgage deed in favour of the respondent. Later, on 31-12-1969 he confirmed the amount outstanding against him by signing the Balance Account Slip. The petitioner admitted having signed the said slip but subsequently denied., He has however failed to produce any evidence to show that the Balance Account Slip did not bear his signature. It was, therefore, rightly held by the Courts below that he had signed the mortgage deed and the Balance Account Slip.
These documents in existence, extend the period of limitation before its expiry. Agreeing with finding of the Courts below we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. The petition has no merit and is, consequently dismissed.