Pakistan Case LawAHMAD DIN Versus HABIB BANK LTD. and 2 others
These civil petitions arise from a judgment of the High Court of Balochistan dismissing appeals against recovery decrees passed by the Banking Tribunal in favour of the respondent bank. The petitioner failed to deposit the decretal amount as ordered by the High Court as a precondition for admitting the appeals, leading to the dismissal of those appeals. Subsequently, the respondent bank initiated execution proceedings and warrants of arrest were issued against the judgment-debtors. The High Court dismissed the subsequent petitions, holding that since the decrees had attained finality, no objections could be raised against their execution based on grounds already decided in the appeals. The Supreme Court of Pakistan found no legal infirmity in the impugned judgment of the High Court and accordingly refused leave to appeal, holding that a final decree cannot be challenged in execution proceedings on matters already settled.
- Whether an appeal against a Banking Tribunal decree can be dismissed for failure to deposit the decretal amount as ordered by the High Court?
- Can objections be raised in execution proceedings against a decree that has attained finality on grounds already decided in appeals?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the concurrent findings of the High Court and the Banking Tribunal regarding recovery suits?
ORDER
FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J---These Civil Petitions Nos. 154-0 to 158-Q of 1993 are directed against the judgment of the learned High Court of Balochistan dated 18-8-1993 passed in Civil Petitions Nos. 54 to 58 of 1992.
2.Facts giving rise to these petitions briefly stated are that 5 suits for recovery of the amount mentioned therein were instituted by the respondent bank against the petitioner before the Banking Tribunal. After hearing the parties the application for leave to defend the suit was dismissed and in consequence the decree in favour of respondent bank was granted as prayed for in those suits. Against the judgment and decree five appeals were filed i,e. Civil Appeals Nos. 12 to 16 of 1992.
3.The learned High Court ordered the appellant to deposit the de retal amount before admitting the appeals to regular hearing, The appellant failed to deposit the decretal amount in the appeals excepting Appeal No, 12 of 1992. In consequence all the above mentioned four Appeals Nos. 13 to 16 of 1992 were dismissed which order was challenged in Civil Petitions Nos, 154-Q to 158-Q of 1993.
4.After the dismissal of the appeals the respondent bank initiated execution proceedings and warrants of arrest were issued against the judgment-debtors. The judgments and decrees of the Banking Tribunal as well as those passed in the appeal by the learned High Court were challenged in the abovementioned Civil Petitions.
5.The learned High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the decree having become final no objection could have been raised to its execution on the ground already decided in the appeals. We find no infirmity in the judgment of the learned High Court. Therefore, leave to appeal is refused in all the petitions.
Judges on this bench
- Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry1,248 judgments
- Fazal Ilahi Khan582 judgments