SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(Bom) 249

S.P.BHARUCHA, C.MOOKERJEE
D. Shanalal – Appellant
Versus
Bank of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT - C. MOOKERJEE, C.J.:---The Bank of Maharashtra which is the respondent in all the twenty two Appeals before us had instituted suits against the appellants in the respective appeals under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, seeking to recover moneys payable by the defendants appellants upon bills of exchange. After summonses of the suit were served upon them, the defendants appellants had entered appearances whereupon the plaintiff -respondent Bank had served upon each set of defendants summonses for judgment under Order XXXVII, Rule 3(2) of the Code. Thereupon the defendants -appellants had applied before the learned Single Judge for leave to defend the respective suits against them. The learned Single Judge had granted them such leave upon condition of depositing the amounts mentioned in the orders. Being aggrieved by the said conditional orders granting leave, the defendants appellants had preferred Appeals before the Division Bench. The Division Bench had upheld the learned Single Judge's orders granting conditional leave but had reduced the amounts of security deposits to be furnished by the defendants. The Appellants had thereafter filed Special Lea




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top