ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

Ist. Appeal No.D-39 of 2013.

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. For katcha peshi.

2. For hearing of M.A. No.679 of 2013.

25-03-2015.

M/s. Muhammad Rafi Kamboh and Nasir Mehmood Mughal, advocates for appellants alongwith Ambar Shahab legal heir of respondent No.3.

Mr. Ishrat Ali Lohar, advocate for the respondent.

The appellants have challenged the order dated 21.05.2013, passed by the Banking Court-I, Hyderabad in Execution Application No.484/2003 (Suit No.02/2002), whereby the application moved by the Decree Holder under Order 21 Rule 64 & 66 CPC was allowed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents filed a Banking Suit against the appellants in the year 2001 for recovery of Rupees 41.658 Millions, which was decreed on 29.03.2003 in the sum of Rs.3,39,15,873. It is an admitted fact that leave to defend application filed by the appellants was dismissed and no appeal was filed against the judgment and decree passed by the Banking Court.

3. The main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for appellants is that the State Bank of Pakistan constituted a Committee for resolution of disputes under Circular No.29 of 2002 and also communicated to the respondent Bank the terms of settlement with the appellants which was not acted upon. The same appellants earlier also moved an application under section 151 C.P.C. in the Executing Court for stay of the execution proceedings on the premise that the Committee of State Bank of Pakistan has resolved the matter, but the said application was dismissed by the Executing Court. Earlier the Executing Court had allowed the application filed by the respondent Bank under Order 21 Rule 64 & 66 CPC, which order was challenged by the same appellants in Ist Appeal No.D-16/2013 and vide order dated 02.05.2013, the learned Division Bench of this Court set aside the order with the directions to the Executing Court to decide the application of the appellants afresh. After remand, the application of the appellants was decided and now the appellants have challenged the order through instant appeal and raised the similar grounds that circular of the State Bank of Pakistan should have been accepted by the Executing Court. It is well settled proposition of law that Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree and it is not the province and domain of the Executing Court to look into the State Bank’s resolution or the decision of the Committee, if any. It is for the appellants to approach to the respondent Bank and or the State Bank of Pakistan for effecting the terms of resolution of dispute or circular, if any, but the appellants cannot press the resolution or circular to be accepted by the Executing Court, which has nothing to do with any settlement but to execute the judgment and decree in its letter and spirit. However, after arguing at some length, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the auction is to be conducted on 06.04.2015 by the Executing Court so in the meanwhile the appellants will approach to the respondent Bank for some settlement, on which the learned counsel for respondent Bank submits that if the appellants will come with some reasonable and proper proposal for the satisfaction of decree he will also look into the matter and advise the Bank accordingly.

4. In view of above, the appeal is dismissed. However, the appellants are at liberty to approach to the respondent Bank for amicable settlement.

JUDGE