Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1434

THE STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN vs THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF NATIONAL

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1434
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal Nos. 6-K and 20-R of 1988
Date1989-04-08
Judge(s).Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ali Hussain Qazilbash
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from two petitions for leave to appeal directed against an order passed by the High Court of Sind in a liquidation proceeding concerning a dispute between two creditors regarding the priority of charge in relation to their respective debts. The High Court had partially accepted the application of one petitioner, prompting cross-challenges where one party sought full relief while the other challenged even the partial relief granted. The core legal question involves the determination of priority of charges among creditors in company liquidation matters. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the questions of law raised in the petitions, directing the early hearing of both appeals along with the filing of all essential documents required for their disposal.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • How is the priority of charges determined between competing creditors in a company liquidation matter?
  • Whether partial relief granted by the High Court regarding debt priority in liquidation is sustainable?
leave to appealcompany liquidationcreditorspriority of chargeliquidation proceedings

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought in these two petitions, against the order, dated 28-10-1987, of High Court of Sind in a liquidation matter.

2. The dispute has been raised by two creditors regarding a priority of charge vis-a-vis the debts concerning each. The High Court has, by the impugned order, partially accepted the application in this behalf of the petitioner in C.P.6/K of 1988. Full relief is being sought now in that petition. On the other hand the grant of the said partial relief also, has been brought under challenge in C.P.20-R of 1988.

3. ' Questions of law raised in these two petitions as explained in the first part of each petition require examination. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Both the appeals shall be heard at an early date with direction for filing of all essential documents which would be required for disposal of the appeals.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.