D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, ANOOP V.MOHTA
State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Jigishaben B. Sanghavi – Respondent
ORAL JUDGMENT: (DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)
Admit. With the consent of all the Learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal has been taken up for hearing and final disposal.
2. The Learned Single Judge dismissed a Chamber Summons, seeking the rejection of a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The State Bank of India, the First Defendant to the suit, is in appeal. The bar to the maintainability of the suit, according to the Appellant, is Section 34 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
3. In March 1996, the Appellant sanctioned a financial facility of Rs.70 crores to Crosslink Shipbreakers (P) Ltd. The Second, Third and Fourth Defendants executed letters of guarantee. The Second and Third Defendants are spouses, and the Second Defendant is the Karta of an HUF. The Fourth Defendant is the son of the Second and Third Defendants. The First Plaintiff is the wife of the Fourth Defendant, while the Second and Third Plaintiffs are their children. The Fourth Plaintiff is the daughter of the Second and Third Defendants. The case of the Appellant is that the Second, Third and Fourt
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.