BR100 Increased By (0.14%)
BR30 Decreased By (-0.19%)
KSE100 Increased By (0.19%)
KSE30 Increased By (0.14%)
AGHA 7.79 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.52%)
BECO 5.23 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.77%)
BML 57.40 Decreased By ▼ -1.26 (-2.15%)
BOP 33.98 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (0.86%)
CNERGY 9.96 Decreased By ▼ -0.65 (-6.13%)
CSIL 5.35 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.94%)
FCCL 54.71 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (1.8%)
FFL 16.72 Increased By ▲ 0.26 (1.58%)
FNEL 1.23 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.82%)
KEL 7.39 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.51%)
KOSM 5.77 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.3%)
LOTCHEM 29.39 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-0.88%)
MLCF 94.25 Decreased By ▼ -2.11 (-2.19%)
NBP 203.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.43 (-0.21%)
NCPL 56.96 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.19%)
NPL 67.78 Increased By ▲ 0.47 (0.7%)
OGDC 316.39 Decreased By ▼ -1.83 (-0.58%)
PACE 10.62 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.09%)
PAEL 43.12 Increased By ▲ 1.35 (3.23%)
PIBTL 16.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.42%)
PPL 220.39 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (0.1%)
PRL 49.30 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (0.51%)
PTC 70.48 Increased By ▲ 0.47 (0.67%)
SSGC 28.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.94 (-3.23%)
TBL 9.90 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.33%)
TELE 8.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.23%)
TPL 18.18 Increased By ▲ 1.01 (5.88%)
TPLP 13.25 Increased By ▲ 0.74 (5.92%)
TREET 22.70 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.49%)
TRG 60.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.12%)

LAHORE: A borrower backed out after giving consent on the appointment of evaluator to sell out pledged stock lying in the custody of bank through public auction, said sources.

The borrower had objected to the appointment of the evaluator on the ground that appointment of evaluator was non-proficient as the chemicals, which were to be evaluated, were highly inflammable and if sampling would be done without specialised care, the whole stock would be destroyed.

He further said that the evaluator does not have any expertise in conducting evaluation of such type of chemicals. Therefore, he sought replacement of the evaluator and proposed another company for the evaluation purposes, saying that the evaluator proposed by him is chemical experts, who could serve the purpose more efficiently and professionally.

However, the bank reminded the borrower that the evaluator was appointed after obtaining his consent. The management of the bank also stressed about the reputation of the evaluator, saying that the evaluator was a well-known chemical expert having a vast experience in conducting evaluation of such type of materials.

The bank management further pointed out that the evaluator being proposed by the borrower was not a recognised and approved evaluator by the State Bank of Pakistan. Therefore, the purpose of challenging the appointment of evaluator by the borrower after giving his consent to it was with ulterior motives to delay the matter.

The matter ultimately landed to adjudication where the relevant forum maintained that the borrower has admitted that the evaluator was appointed by his consent while the bank had raised no objection to expertise/ capabilities of the said evaluator for conducting evaluation of such type of chemicals.

Moreover, the borrower failed to corroborate his stance through any proof of document or evidence that the evaluator lacks expertise. Thus, in the absence of any proof substantiating his stance with regard to non-proficiency of the evaluator for conducting evaluation was turned down and a direction was made to the evaluator to continue with his job to evaluate the stock for public auction.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.