Personal guarantee of a dead person cannot be used against his legal heirs
PLJ 2014 · Sindh High Court
This case is about whether a bank can recover a loan guarantee from the heirs of a man who had personally guaranteed a company's debt but died before the bank filed its recovery suit.
Meezan Bank sued Focus Apparels and others for recovery of over 84 million rupees under a finance agreement. One of the guarantors, Defendant No. 3, had died before the suit was filed, so his name was removed from the case. The bank then asked the court to add his legal heirs as defendants, arguing that the guarantee document itself stated his successors would be liable after his death, and that under the law, death of a surety only ends a guarantee if there is no agreement saying otherwise.
The heirs argued they never knew about any such guarantee, were not parties to it, and that a personal guarantee is a personal obligation that should not automatically pass on to them.
The Sindh High Court agreed with the heirs. It held that a personal guarantee is tied to the individual who gave it and does not bind his legal heirs, since no contract existed between the bank and the heirs themselves. The court also noted that no demand or legal proceeding had been initiated against the guarantor during his lifetime, and the guarantee was effectively revoked by his death. The bank's application to add the heirs was therefore dismissed.
The case matters because it clarifies that banks cannot automatically pursue the heirs of a deceased guarantor for debts unless those heirs had separately agreed to take on that liability.
یہ مقدمہ اس سوال سے متعلق ہے کہ کیا کوئی بینک اس شخص کے ورثاء سے قرض کی ضمانت وصول کر سکتا ہے جس نے کسی کمپنی کے قرض کی ذاتی ضمانت دی تھی مگر بینک کی وصولی کی درخواست دائر ہونے سے پہلے ہی وفات پا گیا۔
میزان بینک نے فوکس اپیرلز اور دیگر کے خلاف ایک مالیاتی معاہدے کے تحت آٹھ کروڑ چالیس لاکھ روپے سے زائد کی وصولی کے لیے مقدمہ دائر کیا تھا۔ ضامنین میں سے ایک، مدعا علیہ نمبر 3، مقدمہ دائر ہونے سے پہلے ہی وفات پا چکا تھا، چنانچہ اس کا نام مقدمے سے خارج کر دیا گیا۔ اس کے بعد بینک نے عدالت سے درخواست کی کہ اس کے قانونی ورثاء کو مدعا علیہان کے طور پر شامل کیا جائے، اور دلیل دی کہ ضمانت کی دستاویز میں خود یہ درج تھا کہ اس کی وفات کے بعد اس کے جانشین ذمہ دار ہوں گے، اور یہ کہ قانون کے مطابق ضامن کی موت صرف اس صورت میں ضمانت کو ختم کرتی ہے جب اس کے برعکس کوئی معاہدہ موجود نہ ہو۔
ورثاء نے دلیل دی کہ انہیں ایسی کسی