AIRLINK 206.05 Decreased By ▼ -4.92 (-2.33%)
BOP 10.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.39 (-3.66%)
CNERGY 6.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.43 (-5.8%)
FCCL 33.54 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.09%)
FFL 17.36 Decreased By ▼ -1.05 (-5.7%)
FLYNG 22.20 Decreased By ▼ -1.42 (-6.01%)
HUBC 129.50 Decreased By ▼ -1.89 (-1.44%)
HUMNL 13.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-1.42%)
KEL 4.88 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-2.01%)
KOSM 6.89 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-3.77%)
MLCF 43.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.37%)
OGDC 208.60 Decreased By ▼ -4.96 (-2.32%)
PACE 7.07 Decreased By ▼ -0.38 (-5.1%)
PAEL 39.20 Decreased By ▼ -2.33 (-5.61%)
PIAHCLA 16.88 Decreased By ▼ -0.59 (-3.38%)
PIBTL 8.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-3.26%)
POWERPS 12.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.08%)
PPL 182.50 Decreased By ▼ -7.10 (-3.74%)
PRL 41.08 Decreased By ▼ -3.23 (-7.29%)
PTC 24.41 Decreased By ▼ -0.56 (-2.24%)
SEARL 101.30 Decreased By ▼ -2.07 (-2%)
SILK 1.04 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.97%)
SSGC 36.75 Decreased By ▼ -3.75 (-9.26%)
SYM 18.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.77 (-3.94%)
TELE 8.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-4.77%)
TPLP 12.96 Decreased By ▼ -0.54 (-4%)
TRG 65.00 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (0.82%)
WAVESAPP 10.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.60 (-5.5%)
WTL 1.62 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-1.82%)
YOUW 3.91 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-7.13%)
BR100 11,807 Decreased By -383.6 (-3.15%)
BR30 35,382 Decreased By -1200.8 (-3.28%)
KSE100 114,213 Decreased By -2041.7 (-1.76%)
KSE30 35,878 Decreased By -725.8 (-1.98%)

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.