AIRLINK 167.80 Decreased By ▼ -10.36 (-5.81%)
BOP 9.78 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-2.59%)
CNERGY 7.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-2.8%)
CPHL 88.00 Decreased By ▼ -4.50 (-4.86%)
FCCL 44.00 Decreased By ▼ -1.77 (-3.87%)
FFL 15.56 Decreased By ▼ -0.34 (-2.14%)
FLYNG 28.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-1.58%)
HUBC 138.25 Decreased By ▼ -3.86 (-2.72%)
HUMNL 12.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-2.73%)
KEL 4.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-2.06%)
KOSM 5.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-5.57%)
MLCF 64.80 Decreased By ▼ -1.49 (-2.25%)
OGDC 212.03 Decreased By ▼ -2.33 (-1.09%)
PACE 5.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-4.65%)
PAEL 45.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.90 (-1.96%)
PIAHCLA 17.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-1.83%)
PIBTL 9.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.50 (-5.12%)
POWER 14.50 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (2.11%)
PPL 167.00 Decreased By ▼ -2.82 (-1.66%)
PRL 30.63 Decreased By ▼ -2.55 (-7.69%)
PTC 21.24 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.44%)
SEARL 90.21 Decreased By ▼ -3.19 (-3.42%)
SSGC 41.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.02%)
SYM 14.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.93 (-6.02%)
TELE 7.43 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-3.26%)
TPLP 9.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.37 (-3.76%)
TRG 65.28 Decreased By ▼ -1.70 (-2.54%)
WAVESAPP 9.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-2.34%)
WTL 1.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.75%)
YOUW 3.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-2.62%)
AIRLINK 167.80 Decreased By ▼ -10.36 (-5.81%)
BOP 9.78 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-2.59%)
CNERGY 7.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-2.8%)
CPHL 88.00 Decreased By ▼ -4.50 (-4.86%)
FCCL 44.00 Decreased By ▼ -1.77 (-3.87%)
FFL 15.56 Decreased By ▼ -0.34 (-2.14%)
FLYNG 28.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-1.58%)
HUBC 138.25 Decreased By ▼ -3.86 (-2.72%)
HUMNL 12.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-2.73%)
KEL 4.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-2.06%)
KOSM 5.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-5.57%)
MLCF 64.80 Decreased By ▼ -1.49 (-2.25%)
OGDC 212.03 Decreased By ▼ -2.33 (-1.09%)
PACE 5.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-4.65%)
PAEL 45.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.90 (-1.96%)
PIAHCLA 17.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-1.83%)
PIBTL 9.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.50 (-5.12%)
POWER 14.50 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (2.11%)
PPL 167.00 Decreased By ▼ -2.82 (-1.66%)
PRL 30.63 Decreased By ▼ -2.55 (-7.69%)
PTC 21.24 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.44%)
SEARL 90.21 Decreased By ▼ -3.19 (-3.42%)
SSGC 41.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.02%)
SYM 14.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.93 (-6.02%)
TELE 7.43 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-3.26%)
TPLP 9.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.37 (-3.76%)
TRG 65.28 Decreased By ▼ -1.70 (-2.54%)
WAVESAPP 9.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-2.34%)
WTL 1.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.75%)
YOUW 3.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-2.62%)
BR100 12,255 Decreased By -261.8 (-2.09%)
BR30 36,723 Decreased By -919.8 (-2.44%)
KSE100 115,020 Decreased By -2206.3 (-1.88%)
KSE30 35,328 Decreased By -691.3 (-1.92%)

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court held that electronically computer-generated statements of accounts are admissible in evidence if the same did not bear signatures.

The court also held that under Section 2 (8) of the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, there is no need to put a certificate on such accounts.

The court passed these orders in a petition of Tasleem Fatima against the Bank of Punjab and said the appellants’ counsel has not been able to point out any law point to the contrary. The court said in view of the Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002, it feels no hesitation to agree with the opinion of the banking court.

The court dismissed the petition and observed that the counsel for the appellant has been unable to point out any discrepancy in the calculation and that payments made beyond the expiry date have been adjusted.

The court observed that said the markup beyond the period of expiry has not been charged and the statement of accounts attached with the plaint does not suffer from any infirmity and payments made by appellants after the expiry period have been adjusted in accounts by the banking court.

The appellants have not been able to deny any entry in the statement of accounts and have not produced any documents to rebut the same hence, the application for leave was rightly dismissed, the court concluded.

The facts of the case are that the respondent bank filed a suit for recovery of Rs 27,01,715 along with costs of funds and other amounts relating thereto against the appellant.

The respondent bank had sanctioned a loan of the amount of Rs 3 million and an amount of Rs 27,01,715 was outstanding at the time of filing of suit.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023

Comments

Comments are closed.