BANKING LAWS AND

PRACTICE
Recovery Ordnance 2001

PRESENTED TO:
MR. ZARGHAM ULLAH KHAN

PRESENTED BY:
MUHAMMAD BILAL NAQVI M11BBA049
ASAD RIAZ
M11BBA045
ALI HAMZA
M11BBA071
SIDDIQUE DABIR
M11BBA074
RABANI INTIZAR
M11BBA032

BANK ALFALAH
V/S
SHOUKAT ZAMAN (KHAN)

SUIT FILED :

BEFORE THE JUDGE, BANKING COURT NO.1

LAHORE.
Jurisdiction under Section 9 of the financial institution
(recovery of finances ordinance 2001)
Presented by Mr. Ahmad Pervaiz advocate at 12:10 pm on
02-01-2010
The suit bears court fess of 15000/- (sufficient/insufficient)
to the extent of
/SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF LOAN OF 10,68,888.03/-(ONE
MILLION SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY EIGHT RUPPES AND THREE PAISAS ONLY)

THE NOTICES ARE GIVEN IN THE DAILY

ENGLISH AND URDU NEWS PAPERS ON 20
JAN 2010.

SUMMON HAS BEEN SENT BY THE COURT

UNDER SECTION 9(5) IN FORM NO 4 TO THE
DEFENDANT ON 13-01-2010

OFFICERS POWER OF
ATTORNEY
1. Mr. Ayyaz Mehmood butt S/O Mr.
Mehmood ahmed butt.
2. Mr. Jamshed Yousaf S/O Mr.
Muhammad Yousaf.

PLAINT
BANK AL-FALAH LIMITED
a banking company
incorporated and
registered under the
companies ordinance
1984 having its registered
office at Bank Al-Falah
building 11 Chundrigar
road Karachi with a branch
office known as Circular
Road Branch Lahore.
.plaintif

v/s

MR. SHOUKAT ZAMAN

KHAN
proprietor/guarantor Son
of Khalil-ur-rehman
resident of
shad bagh Lahore,
carrying on business under
the name and style of M/S
SHOUKAT GARMENTS at
,Landa Bazazr
Lahore.
.defendant no. 1

PLAINT
BANK AL-FALAH LIMITED
a banking company
incorporated and
registered under the
companies ordinance
1984 having its registered
office at Bank Al-Falah
building 11 Chundrigar
road Karachi with a branch
office known as Circular
Road Branch Lahore.
.plaintif

v/s

MR. KHALIL-UR-REHMAN
mortgagor/guarantor, Son
of Rehmatullah resident of
shad bagh,
Lahore.

.defendant no. 2

PLAINT

1. The addresses are given by defendant

2. The plaintif is a financial institution
3. The suit is filed through by duly authorized person
4. Defendant no. 1 to 2 is also being sued in their capacity
as a mortgagor.

DESCRIPTION OF MORTGAGE
PROPERTY:

05 marlas 17 sq.ft consisting of 1142/1550 share of 07

kanals 25sq.ft commonly known as plot no.4 Muhammad
din Park ,
The estimated value of the mortgage property is
18,40,000/- on this day 16 -08-2005

PLAINT

1. Defendant no. 1 applied for the facility on 19/07/2005

The sanctioned facility was to expire on 31/08/2006

2. Defendants executed the following documents in favor of

the bank

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

I.

Agreement for financing on markup basis dated

16/08/2005

II. SBP Prudential's regulations dated 20/08/2005

III. Letter of arrangement dated 20/08/2005
IV. Letter of continuity
V. Demand promissory note dated 20/08/2005
VI. Personal guarantees dated 20/08/2005

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

VII. Undertaking dated 20/08/2005
VIII. Letter of hypothecation dated 20/08/2005
IX. Agreement dated 16/08/2005
X. Mortgage deed dated 16/08/2005
XI. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of the
property dated 20/08/2005
XII. General power of attorney dated 16/08/2005
XIII.Personal financial statements dated 20/08/2005

SIDDIQUE DABIR

M11BBA074

PLAINT

(RENEWAL OF POLICY)
(04-09-2006)
7. Renewal of the policy by defendants from
the plaintif bank vide as on 24/08/2006
Defendants get the ofer vide letter from the
bank on 04/09/2006
The renewed facility was to expire on
31/08/2007

8. That the pursuant executed following of

documents in favor of the bank for renewal
facility.

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

(RENEWAL OF POLICY)
(04-09-2006)

I.

Agreement for financing on markup basis dated

04/09/2006

II. SBP Prudential's regulations dated 04/09/2006

III. Letter of arrangement dated 04/09/2006
IV. Letter of continuity dated 04/09/2006
V. Demand promissory note dated 04/09/2006
VI. Personal guarantees dated dated 04/09/2006

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

(RENEWAL OF POLICY)
(04-09-2006)

VII. Undertaking dated 04/09/2006

VIII. Letter of authority dated 04/09/2006
IX. Agreement dated 04/09/2006
X. Mortgage deed dated 04/09/2006
XI. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of the
property dated 04/09/2006
XII. Personal financial statements dated 04/09/2006

PLAINT

RENEWAL OF POLICY
(01-09-2007)

9. Renewal of the policy by defendants from

the plaintif bank vide as on 01/09/2007
Defendants get the ofer vide letter from the bank on
01/09/2007
The renewed facility was to expire on 31/08/2008

10.That the pursuant executed following of

documents in favor of the bank for renewal
facility

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL OF POLICY
(01-09-2007)

I.

Agreement for financing on markup basis dated

01/09/2007

II. SBP Prudential's regulations dated 01/09/2007

III. Letter of arrangement dated 01/09/2007
IV. Letter of continuity dated 01/09/2007
V. Demand promissory note dated 01/09/2007
VI. Personal guarantees dated dated 01/09/2007

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL OF POLICY
(01-09-2007)

VII. Undertaking dated 01/09/2007

VIII. Letter of authority dated 01/09/2007
IX. Agreement dated 01/09/2007
X. Mortgage deed dated 01/09/2007
XI. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of the
property dated 01/09/2007
XII. Personal financial statements dated 01/09/2007

PLAINT

RENEWAL POLICY
25-08-2008
11.Renewal of the policy by defendants from
the plaintif bank vide as on 25/08/2008

Defendants get the ofer vide letter from the bank

on 19/09/2008
The renewed facility was to expire on 28/02/2009

12. That the pursuant executed following of

documents in favor of the bank for renewal
facility.

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL POLICY
25-08-2008

I.

Agreement for financing on markup basis dated

19/09/2008

II. SBP Prudential's regulations dated 19/09/2008

III. Letter of arrangement dated 19/09/2008
IV. Letter of continuity dated 19/09/2008
V. Demand promissory note dated 19/09/2008
VI. Personal guarantees dated dated 19/09/2008

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL POLICY
25-08-2008

VII. Undertaking dated 19/09/2008

VIII. Letter of authority dated 19/09/2008
IX. Agreement dated 19/09/2008
X. Mortgage deed dated 19/09/2008
XI. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of the
property dated 19/09/2008
XII. Personal financial statements dated 19/09/2008

PLAINT

RENEWAL POLICY
23-03-2009
13.Renewal of the policy by defendants from the
plaintif bank vide as on 23/03/2009

Defendants get the ofer vide letter from the bank on

28/04/2009
The renewed facility was to expire on 30/09/2010

14.That the pursuant executed following of

documents in favor of the bank for renewal
facility

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL POLICY
23-03-2009

I.

Agreement for financing on markup basis dated

28/04/2009

II. SBP Prudential's regulations dated 28/04/2009

III. Letter of arrangement dated 28/04/2009
IV. Letter of continuity dated 28/04/2009
V. Demand promissory note dated 28/04/2009
VI. Personal guarantees dated dated 28/04/2009

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL POLICY
23-03-2009

VII. Undertaking dated 28/04/2009

VIII. Letter of authority dated 28/04/2009
IX. Agreement dated 28/04/2009
X. Mortgage deed dated 28/04/2009
XI. Memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of the
property dated 28/04/2009
XII. Personal financial statements dated 28/04/2009

PLAINT

DEFENDANTS AGREEMENT WITH BANK

RENEWAL POLICY
23-03-2009

15.Amounts were disbursed to the

defendant

Defendant failed to perform their legal

obligation for the financing availed on
28/04/2009
Bank has sent the letters to the defendant to
perform his obligations..

ALI HAMZA
M11BBAO71

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
16.As per record maintained by the bank
.A sum of Rs. 1068888.03/- (one million sixty eight
thousand eight hundred eighty eight and three paisas
only) owed to the plaintif bank by the defendant bank.
.9(3) (a) amount of finance availed by the defendant
Rs.1,000,000/-

.9(3) (b) amount paid by the defendant

toward the finance
Rs.(not mentioned)

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
(9) (3) (c) amount of finance and other amounts relating to
the finance payable by the defendants towards the bank:
PRINCIPAL: RS. 9,42,326.46
MARK UP: RS. 126,561.57
TOTAL :

RS: 1,068,888.03

(statements of accounts are duly verified in accordance with

the bankers book evidence act, 1891 and recovery ordinance
has an integral part of this plaint)

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
the defendants have and continue to
commit wilful DEFAULT in repayment
Repeated request have failed to clear
their liabilities. Hence, this suit.

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
the cause of action arose in favor of the plaintif
bank
the cause of action also arose every time
the above mentioned:
:Were executed

Mortgage was created

Defendants defaulted in making their
payments
Defendants continue to be In default

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
19) that the parties reside and carry on their business in
Lahore
documents above are also executed in Lahore
The facility was also granted at Lahore
Lahore is where the cause of action arise
The Honourable Court has the exclusive jurisdiction to:
a) Entertain this case
b) Adjudicate this matter

PLAINT
PLAINTIFF CLAIM
20) that the value of the suit is Rs. 1,068,888.03 (one
million sixty eight thousand eight hundred eighty eight
and three paisas only) and the maximum court fee of the
Rs. 15000/- has been affixed on the plant.

RABANI INTIZAR

M11BBA032

PRAYER
In the view of the Aforesaid most respectfully said that the
court may be pleased to pass the decree in favor of the plaintif
and against the defendant in the following manner

a) for the recovery of Rs. 1,068,888.03/- (one million

sixty eight thousand eight hundred eighty eight and
three paisa's only)

b) The mark up and cost of funds , charges from the date

of default till realization of decretal amount

PRAYER
c) The property mortgaged in favor of the
plaintif be ordered to be sold for satisfaction
of the HONOURABLE COURTS DECREE
d) personal assets or other properties of the
defendants be attached and sold for the
satisfaction of the decree in favor of the
plaintif bank.

PRAYER
e) in case the decree cannot be satisfied through the
liquidation the assets , the defendants may be
arrested and detained I the civil prison in accordance
with the law.
f) Costs of the suit and other expenses incurred and to
be incurred in this regard may also be awarded;
g) Any other relief that this honorable court deems fit
and proper under the circumstances of the case may

PRAYER
Verification:
verified on oath at Lahore this 1st day of Jan 2010 that
the contents of paragraphs number 1 to 17 are true to the
best of my knowledge and that the contents of paragraphs
number 18 to 20 are believed to be true as per information
received.

ASAD RIAZ
M11BBA045

DEFENDANT CLAIM:
In the court of judge banking court No 1 Lahore
Bank Al-falah V/S Shukaht Zaman etc.

on behalf of defendant under section 10 of

the financial institution recovery of finance
ordinance 2001 for the grant of
unconditional leave to appear and defend the
suit

POWER OF ATTORNEY:
1. ALI SAJID MIRZA. ON BEHALF OF THE
DEFENDANT.
TO ACT AND APPEAR AND PLEAD IN THE
CASE
TO PRESENT PLEADINGS AND APPELAS
CROSS OBJECTIONS OR PETITIONS

AFFIDAVIT:
Affidavit of Shaukat Zaman son of Khalil-urRahman resident of house no
shadbagh Lahore.

a. That the contents of the accompanying

application may kindly be read as integral
part of this affidavit.
b. That the contents of the accompanying
application are correct and true to the best
of my knowledge and nothing has been
concealed therefrom.

RE: PLAINT
1. That the plaintiff has not come to this
honorable court with clean hands hence suit is
liable to be dismissed
2. That the plaintiff has no cause of action
against deponent hence the suit is liable to
be rejected
3. That the suit of plaintiff is based on malice
and concoction which is totally based on the
futile imagination of the plaintiff. So, the
same is liable to dismissed with special cost
U\S 35 A CPC.

RE: PLAINT
4. that the following substantial question of law
and facts arise for determination by his
honorable court for which leave to defend is to
be granted to the applicant / defendant in the
interest of justice
I. Whether the plaintiff has not come to this
honorable court with clean hands, Hence the suit
is liable to be dismissed .

II.

Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action

against answering defendant hence the plaintiff
is liable to be rejected as it evident from the
clause 18 where no specific date default is
written as the space is left blank which proves

BILAL NAQVI
M11BBA049

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
it is humbly submitted that no proper
authorization is given to Mr.ayyaz mahmood
and Muhammad jamshed Yousaf
U/S 13 rule 1.2.3 it is mandatory provision
that all the document must be original to be
presented before the court when the suit is
filed.

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
It is submitted in this context that the defendant
/ petitioner obtained the finance facility which
is obtained on the basis of running finance
facility for the running of his business the
defendant / petitioner

the plaintiff obtained facility on 19 .

07.2005
to the extent of
Rs. 10,00.000
paid more than 35,00,000

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
in the month of August 2009 on the request of the
bank authorities Defendants/ petitioners paid Rs. 55,000/to the bank with the commitments the matter be settled
amicably

instead of issuing the NOC to the Defendants/

petitioners the Defendants/ petitioners came by
surprised when on 15.03.2010a notice by hand
is served upon by the server of this Honorable
court regarding the pendency of this titled suit.

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
5. (CONT)
.It is further to be added that as per rules and based upon
numerous judgments of Apex courts the cases must be
decided on merits rather than on technicalities as the
Defendants/ petitioners never ever defaulted , therefore,
under this score only the suit is liable to be dismissed.

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
furthermore on probing into the matter it that
the suit is just filed to blackmail and harassed
the Defendants/ petitioners.
from clause 18 there is no specific date upon when the
Defendants/ petitioners became defaulters.
On this score this suit is liable to be dismissed.

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
The Defendants/ petitioners never requested to further
renewal of the facility,
The bank to maintain his books good requested the
defendants for renewal of the facility.
The Defendants are in good books of the bank so they are
renewing his finance facility.

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
7. CONT
.4th feb 2011 lastly and finally upon the request of the
recovery official of the branch of the plaintiff. The
defendant paid Rs. 30.000/- upon the assurance firstly
that the bank never initiate any proceedings against
the defendant/petitioners along with they also released
the mortgage property of the defendant / petitioners
along with the issuance of NOC to the defendant
/petitioners but deposit all the commitments they
betrayed the defendant /petitioners by keeping secrete
the pendency of the said suit which came by surprised
for the defendabt / petitioners the defendant /
petitioners has got equal to initiate criminal
proceedings against the concerned official of the bank

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
Para no 8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.

Detailed reply is already given in the preceding pars, hence

the paras Is denied

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
16. Para no 16 is denied vehemently and categorically nothing is
due against the defendant /petitioners.
It is important to mention here that the defendant
/petitioners availed the running finance facility Rs.
10.00.000/ in the year 2005 and till august 2009 paid more
then RS 35.00.000/

in the month august 2009 to settle the matter the plaintif bank
demanded RS. 55.000 which was paid by the defendant /petitioners

Also the plaintif bank has failed to determine the amount of default

17.para no 17 is denied as the Defendants/

petitioners never ever defaulted in the

RE: PLAINT
ON MERITS:
18. para no 18 is denied . no cause of action is
accrued in the favor of the plaintiff and
against the Defendants/ petitioners because
the Defendants/ petitioners never ever
defaulted in the payment nor any specific
date default is written in the para prove
that the defendants/ petitioners are defaulted
in the payment
19.LEGAL
20.LEGAL

RE: PLAINT
PRAYER:

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed

that this application may very kindly be
accepted and leave to appear and
defend the suit may also be granted to
the defendant or in alternative the suit of
the plaintiff be dismissed in-liming in
the light of Para no 18 of the plaintiff

RE: PLAINT

VERIFICATION:
The Verified on oath at Lahore on this 07th day of April
2010 that the contents of the paragraphs no.1 to 17
are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and
those of remaining paragraph no 18 to 20 including
preliminary objections are true the best of information
to belief