IN THE COURT OF JUDGE BANKING COURT NO.

II LAHORE

Civil Suit No.____________

M/s Habib Bank Ltd

V/s

M/s I K Garments etc.

PETITION (WRITTEN STATEMENT) UNDER SECTION 10 OF (FINANCIAL INSTITUTION RECOVERY OF FINANCE) ORDINANCE 2001 FOR GRANT OF UN CONDITIONAL LEAVE TO DEFEND THE SUYIT ON BEHALF OF DEFENTANT NO.3.

AFFIDAVIT OF MST. AKHTAR JAN WD/O AHMAD KHAN R/O HOUSE No.65 Street No.3 Kasurpura band road,Lahore.

I, the above named deponent do here by solemnly affirm and declare as under:-

PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS
1)

That the present petition is moved within time as provided under Law whereas the petitioner was informed by the proclamation in daily News paper The News through a person of my family on dated 19-12-2008.

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
1) That the present suit is false, factitious and having no nexus with the present petitioner.

2) That the plaintiff is having no cause of action against the answering defendant, hence the plaint is liable to be rejected under order 7 rule 11 CPC. 3) That the plaintiff approached that this honorable Court with un clean hands and this entails the dismissal of the suit under law. 4) That the whole procedure adopted by plaintiff is void and is done to cover there own negligence, malicious as well as to cover there forgery, malfeasance and illegalities.

QUESTION OF LAW AND FACTS

1) Whether this honorable court has jurisdiction to entertain the present suit under reply?. 2) Whether there is privity of contract between the plaintiff and present petitioner?. 3) Whether the present suit in maintable to the extent of defendant no.3 in the eye of law?. 4) Whether the present plaintiff having any locus standi against the present petitioner to file the present suit ?. 5) Whether the present suit is barred by law?. 6) Whether the present suit is not liable to dismissed as the same has not been framed in accordance with law contained in section 9 (3) of ordinance XLVII of 1891?.

7) Whether the alleged relevant documents relating to grant of finance can be taken into consideration since they are nether attested by authorized officer nor they are in original?. 8) Whether the suit is not liable to be rejected as the same does not disclose any cause of action against the present defendant?. 9) Whether the present suit can be instituted in court of law on the basis of power of attorney without accompanying the resolution of board of directors and without memorandum and articles of the associations of the financial institution?. 10) Whether the suit can be filed against the person who has not availed the alleged the finance facility neither executed any document / personal guarantee nor the plaintiff having any fiduciary relationship with petitioner/defendant?. 11) Whether the suit is not maintainable due to none joinder of necessary parties ?. 12) That whether the suit is not hit by Section 23 of Contract Act?.

SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF FACTS

1) That the plaint being based on incorrect assertation and manipulation of record. The plaintiff has distorted and conceal the material facts. Accordingly no degree can be passed under the law in favor of plaintiff and against the petitioner/ respondents:

i)

that the present petitioner has bought the plot i.e measuring 3- Marla bearing Khawet No.237 Khatooni No. Khasra No. 1109 situated at Farooq Park New Abadi Hadbust Mouza Mehmood Boti Tehsil Cantt Distt Lahore through Sale Deed registered vide document No.436 Book No.1 Volume No.1178 dated 12-2-2007 with Sub Registrar Shalimar Town Lahore from Haji Abdul Ghafoor attorney of Muhammad Khalid vide registered document No. 2633 book No.4 Volume No. 114 dated 10-11-06 with Sub-Registrar Shalimar Town, Lahore. Then the above said property was also mutated by Revenue Authorities on dated 16-3-2007 in name of Mst Akhtar Jan Wd/o Ahmad Khan. Photo copy of Sale Deed and record of mutation are attached as Annexure A and B.

ii)

That it is imported question of fact and law that present petitioner is the owner of above said plot where as the plaintiff had said that defendant No.2 has mortgaged a house in favor of plaintiff.

iii)

It is to a very important question of fact and law that Sale Deed can not be registered without verification of concerned departments of holders of the Revenue records. Where as the Sale Deed registered and the property also mutated in favor of present petitioner without any hurdle?.

iv)

That the present petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of the above said plot while registration of sale deed all the concerned authorities had never raised any question that there is a bar of mortgage in our record , so how one can get to be know that above said plot is bank pledged property.

2) That the petitioner is not a defaulter customer, in the present case nether the petitioner applied for any alleged financed facility from the plaintiff nor is beneficiary of any alleged finance facility of the plaintiff. 3) That the contents of the plaint does not get support from the document annexed with it to the extent present petitioner. It is respectfully submitted that a plaintiff can only file a suit of Financial Institution (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance 2001, where a customer commits default in fulfillments of any obligation with regards to any finance. The present petitioner is neither a customer nor a guarantor. 4) That the petitioner purchased the above said plot by spending money of orphans for the better of their future, the petitioner had no knowledge that the above said property is a bank pledged property, where as the petitioner bank sanctioned loan on a house and trying to snatch away the skins of orphans where it is clear that its a complete mistake and negligence of plaintiff bank, Where as the plaintiff disbursed the alleged financed facility some one else in surety of house and trying to cause the present defendant huge loss without any legal justification. 5) That the being based on in correct assertions and manipulation of record. The plaintiff bank has distorted the material facts. Accordingly no degree can be passed in favor of plaintiff and against the present petitioner. 6) That the alleged documents placed on record are forged and fabricated being no nexus with the present petitioner.

ON MARITS
1) 2) Para No.1need no comments Para No.2 is denied to be in correct as no incorporation certificate, commencement certificate/State Bank of Pakistan has not been attached with the present plaint by

virtue of which it can be ascertain that present plaintiff is a financial institution. 3) Para No.3 vehemently denied because the present defendant had no any concern with the plaintiff bank. That the present plaintiff can not implead the defendant because there is no cause of action could be taken against, the defendant has neither availed any finance facility from the plaintiff bank nor has mortgaged any property. 4) 5) 6) Para No.4 needs no reply. Para No.5 is denied that the answering defendant never availed any kind of facility from the plaintiff bank. Para No.6 is vehemently denied that the answering defendant never signed any document in favor of plaintiff bank. 7) 8) 9) 10) Para No.7 need no reply. Para No.8 is denied that the answering defendant never availed any kind of facility from the plaintiff bank. Para No.9 denied that there is no any liability never ever created against the defendant. Para No.10 denied that no any notices never ever serve to answering defendant nor the answering defendant have concerned herewith. 11) Para No.11 denied that the answering defendant is owner of the concern plot by a duly registered sale deed before the sub registrar Shalimar town, Lahore and mutation is also transferred in name of answering defendant in the revenue record and it never came into the knowledge of answering defendant that the said property pledged with the plaintiff bank, even and otherwise nothing could be happened. 12) Para No.12 need no reply.

13)

Para No.13 denied that there is no liability on the defendant because the answering defendant is not the customer of plaintiff bank.

14) 15) 16)

Para No.14 is denied that the answering defendant never availed any kind of facility from the plaintiff bank. Para No.15 legal. Para No.16 vehemently denied that there is no cause of action accrued in favor of plaintiff bank against the answering defendant.

17) 18)

Para No.17 legal. Para No.18 legal.

In the light of above mentioned facts and assertions it is respectfully prayed that:1) That suit under reply may kindly be dismissed with special compensatory cost under Section 35-A C.P.C. 2) That plaint may kindly be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. 3) That petitioner / defendant may kindly be allowed unconditional leave to defend the suit. 4) That the cost of the suit may also be granted. 5) that any other relief which this Honable Court may deems fit may also be awarded in favour of the defendant.

PRAYER

DEPONENT

Verification
Verified on oath at Lahore on this 9th day of Jan 2009 that the contents of the para No.1 to 15 are true to the best of our knowledge & those of para No.16 to 18 are correct to the best of our belief.

DEPONENT