Citation Name :
2006 CLD 178
LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Side Appellant :
AMIR JAVED
Side Opponent :
AL-BARAKA ISLAMIC INVESTMENT BANK
—Ss.7, 17 & 3—Contract Act
(IX of 1872), Ss.132 & 135—Suit for recovery of loan—Contract of
guarantee—Responsibility of guarantor—Scope–
-Contract of
guarantee, in the present case, showed that defendants had signed and
guaranteed the loan agreement not being the guarantors only but as a
principal debtor—Liability to pay said defendants shall not stand
discharged merely by resorting to S.133, Contract Act, 1872—Liability of
defendants, besides being guarantor, was also in their capacity as
principal debtor—Subsequent agreements would not absolve the defendants
of their liability because defendants had bound themselves by virtue of
the contract of guarantee that their liability shall remain unaffacted
even in the event of modification, variation of the terms of facility,
compositions or other arrangements’ with the customer of the
Bank—Contract of guarantee was itself an independent agreement, the
terms whereof had bound the parties in isolation with main
agreement—Provisions of Ss.133 & 135 Contract Act, 1872, visualized
consent -or assent of the guarantors at the time of variance only and
the same could not be waived by the guarantors in advance.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.