124/2011 Suit.B NATIONAL BANK OF PAKSITAN (Plaintiff) V/S FATEH TEXTILE MILLS LTD & OTHERS (Defendant)

Sindh High Court2017

Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)

Share on WhatsApp
124/2011 Suit.B NATIONAL BANK OF PAKSITAN (Plaintiff) V/S FATEH TEXTILE MILLS LTD & OTHERS (Defendant) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) Order Date: 07-FEB-17 The presumption of truth cannot be said to be attached to a statement of account, which is not certified as required under Act 1891. Computer generated accounts may not have required attestation under Act 1891 for any other issue but not for considering the claim of the plaintiff as true and correct. Indeed such statement could be believed to be true in case it is ratified as above and on the assumption/confirmation that it is certified by the relevant officers concerned. Even in a computer generated statement, the statistics/figures are being fed by the accountants. These accountants were previously used to prepare ledger/accounts books through their own hands/manually hence the presumption of truth in relation to both the statements could only be said to be attached in case they are certified, as required under the law. --It is a settled principle of law that in case of conflict between special laws and general laws, special laws prevail. ----It is quite surprising that despite the judgment of Honble Supreme Court, whereby the appointment of the President of the plaintiff bank was held to be unconstitutional, the Power of Attorney executed by such alleged president was continued to be implemented/ acted upon. This act of the plaintiff bank is not only contemptuous but also unlawful and illegal in view of the fact that the principal ceased to exist the moment the judgment was rendered by the Honble Supreme Court insofar as the appointment of the president of the plaintiff bank is concerned
Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Red Notices against Foreign National Proclaimed Offender

PLJ 2024 Karachi 138 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2024

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013 explained in a Judgment

PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154 · Sindh High Court · 2022

Article 140- Cross Examination of a Witness

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020

Re-Examination is more important than Examination in Chief

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020