Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
ZAHOOR VS SAD UL IBRAR
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD FAROOQ AFRIDI VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD AMJAD VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD FAROOQ VS THE STATEAFRIDI
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
Dadabhoy Cement Industries VS NDFC ( Dadabhoy Case )
Summary: Dadabhoy Case - The settlement of outstanding loans and advances by the appellants. In this case, various terms and conditions for loan settlement were outlined, specifying different percentages of the principal amount to be paid based on the duration of the loans. The document mentioned the use of Circulars issued by the Banking Control Department (BCD) and how they influenced the inclusion of accrued interest and mark-up in the principal amount. It argued that subsequent Circulars (No. 19 and 36) had modified the original Circulars, allowing for the inclusion of mark-up and interest in the principal amount for rescheduling or restructuring loans --- contended that the appellants' claims of fraud, misrepresentation, and violation of Circulars were not valid. It was asserted that the Circulars were not applicable retrospectively, as the government had announced a policy to end charging of interest from a specific date --- the maintainability of the appeals and whether the appellants had waived their right to challenge the consent decree. It also mentioned the Corporate and Industrial Restructuring Ordinance, 2000, and the Non-Performing Assets and Rehabilitation of Industrial Undertaking (Legal Proceedings) Ordinance, and their potential impact on the case.
Dadabhoy Cement Industries VS NDFC ( Dadabhoy Case )
Summary: Dadabhoy Case - The settlement of outstanding loans and advances by the appellants. In this case, various terms and conditions for loan settlement were outlined, specifying different percentages of the principal amount to be paid based on the duration of the loans. The document mentioned the use of Circulars issued by the Banking Control Department (BCD) and how they influenced the inclusion of accrued interest and mark-up in the principal amount. It argued that subsequent Circulars (No. 19 and 36) had modified the original Circulars, allowing for the inclusion of mark-up and interest in the principal amount for rescheduling or restructuring loans --- contended that the appellants' claims of fraud, misrepresentation, and violation of Circulars were not valid. It was asserted that the Circulars were not applicable retrospectively, as the government had announced a policy to end charging of interest from a specific date --- the maintainability of the appeals and whether the appellants had waived their right to challenge the consent decree. It also mentioned the Corporate and Industrial Restructuring Ordinance, 2000, and the Non-Performing Assets and Rehabilitation of Industrial Undertaking (Legal Proceedings) Ordinance, and their potential impact on the case.
HABIB BANK LIMITED VS AL JALAL TEXTILE MILLS LTD
Summary: Summary pending.
ROSHAN S VS THE ST ATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MASTER SAID VS CH IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN DISTRICT JUDGEJHANG
Summary: Summary pending.