ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

I.A. Nos.16, 17 & 18 of 2022

___________________________________________________________________ Date Order with signature of Judge

___________________________________________________________________

I.A. No.16 of 2022

FRESH CASE:

1. For order on CMA No.494/2022 (Urgent).

2. For order on office objection a/w reply as at ‘A’.

3. For order on CMA No.487/2022 (Exemption).

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For order on CMA No.488/2022 (Stay).

I.A. No.17 of 2022

FRESH CASE:

1. For order on CMA No.496/2022 (Urgent).

2. For order on office objection a/w reply as at ‘A’.

3. For order on CMA No.489/2022 (Exemption).

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For order on CMA No.490/2022 (Stay).

I.A. No.18 of 2022

FRESH CASE:

1. For order on CMA No.497/2022 (Urgent).

2. For order on office objection a/w reply as at ‘A’.

3. For order on CMA No.491/2022 (Exemption).

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For order on CMA No.492/2022 (Stay).

-----------

21^st February 2022

Ms. Naheed A. Shahid, Advocate for Appellant.

-*-*-*-*-*-

1. Urgency granted.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to comply with office objection before next date of hearing.

3. Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.

4&5. Learned counsel for the appellant files a statement in all above appeals alongwith certified copy of the combined judgment dated 29.07.2021 and decree dated 04.11.20921 passed by the learned Banking Court No.III, at Karachi in Suits No.72, 70, and 71 of 2017, which according to learned counsel for appellant, has been duly amended pursuant to the application filed under Section 152 CPC read with Section 27 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, which is subject matter of instant appeals. Same is taken on record, however, subject to all just exceptions.

Above appeals arise against a combined judgment dated 11.12.2021 and decree dated 23.12.2021 passed by the learned Banking Court No.III, at Karachi in the three aforesaid suits filed by the respondent against the appellant for the recovery of amount outstanding against the principal borrower in which the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant was guarantor in respect of the finance facilities extended to the principal borrower, who according to learned counsel, was neither impleaded as party nor there has been judgment and decree against the main principal borrower, however, the appellant has been roped in these recovery proceedings. It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the suits filed by the respondent in such a form were not maintainable, whereas, an objection was raised on this count, however, no finding has been given and the suits have been decreed keeping in view the contents of the plaint and the evidence without appreciating that unless there is some judgment and decree with regard to the liability of the principal borrower, a guarantor cannot be held responsible for default, if any, by the principal borrower. In support of her contention, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the cases of NATIONAL COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. v. MOHAMMAD TUFAIL AND ANOTHER [PLD 1975 KARACHI 671] and HABIB BANK LIMITED v. RAMZAN BAKHSH TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED AND 22 OTHERS [2003 C L D 1142].

Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondent, to be served through first three modes, for 15.03.2022, when objection/reply, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to the learned counsel for appellant. However, till next date of hearing, the operation of the impugned judgment shall remain suspended.

J U D G E