| Case ID |
21440ef8-3e75-4533-a2f9-b2ebe133ae14 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Regular First Appeals Nos.264 of 1998 and 108 of 1 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 17, 2003 |
| Hearing Date |
Sep 17, 2003 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed both appeals filed by Muhammad Ajmal Khan and United Bank Limited. The court modified the decree to deduct the proceeds from the sale of the vehicles from the total amount recoverable. The court found that the appellant's claims regarding the signing of blank documents and manipulation by the bank were unsubstantiated. The judgment reinforced the principles of the Negotiable Instruments Act, particularly the provisions regarding the authority given by signing incomplete instruments and the estoppel principle preventing the challenge of the legality of endorsed documents. Consequently, the court concluded that the appellant's appeal had no merit, while also rejecting the bank's appeal for modification of the decree amount. |
| Summary |
In the case of Regular First Appeals Nos.264 of 1998 and 108 of 1999, the Lahore High Court addressed critical issues regarding the interpretation of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the Banking Companies Recovery Act. The appellant, Muhammad Ajmal Khan, contested a decree for recovery issued against him due to default on financial accommodations provided by United Bank Limited for the purchase of vehicles. The court evaluated the claims regarding the legality of documents signed under duress and the implications of sections 20, 118, and 120 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The decision emphasized the binding nature of signed documents and the limitations on raising new pleas at the appellate stage. The court dismissed both appeals while modifying the decree to ensure fair recovery based on the sale of the collateral vehicles. This case highlights the importance of understanding contractual obligations and the legal framework governing negotiable instruments in banking transactions. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
United Bank Limited
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR,
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ
|
| Lawyers |
Sh. Asif Feroz
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD AJMAL KHAN
|
| Respondents |
UNITED BANK LIMITED
|
| Citations |
2004 SLD 704 = 2004 CLD 1577
|
| Other Citations |
Mian Rafique Saigol and another v. Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd. and another PLD 1996 SC 749,
Muhammad Sharif v. Muhammad Hasim Paracha and another PLD 1987 Kar. 76,
S.K. Abdul Aziz v. Mahmoodul Hassan and 3 others 1988 CLC '337,
Haji Karim and another v. Zikar Abdullah 1973 SCMR 100,
Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. v. Messrs Gujrat Friends Traders and others PLD 1988 Lah. 166,
Messrs United Bank Ltd. v. President Bazm-e-Salat and another PLD 1986 Kar. 464,
Bazm-e-Salat and others v. Messrs United Bank Ltd. PLD 1989 Kar. 150,
Prudential Commercial Bank Ltd. v. Hydari Ghee Industries Ltd. and 9 others 1999 MLD 1694,
Messrs Bank of Oman Limited v. Messrs East Asia Trading Co. Ltd. and 4 others 1987 CLC 288
|
| Laws Involved |
Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881),
Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)
|
| Sections |
20,
118,
120,
21
|