Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section 16- In the instant matter, the order dated 16.4.2013 dismissing the first application filed by the respondent seeking sale of the goods did not adjudicate on merits, rather the Banking Court specifically termed the said application premature. This clearly leaves the matter to be decided at a later stage. Further, the subsequent application filed by the respondent seeking sale of the goods indicates a development in that the keys of the godown where the goods were located were no longer with the muccadam of the bank, hence their apprehension that the appellant might misappropriate the goods, which circumstances did not prevail at the time of the first application. We are of the view that the argument by the learned counsel for the appellant that the second application was barred by the principle of res judicata is misconceived. The order for sale of the goods in question passed by the learned Single Judge-in-Chambers and the order upholding such order of sale in appeal passed by the learned Division Bench of the Banking Court are illegal, being in violation of the provisions of Section 16 of the Ordinance. Therefore, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. ...... Gulistan Textile Mills Ltd. =VS= Soneri Bank Ltd., [4 LM (SC) 130]
