( 1 ) IN this revision petition directed against a composite order rejecting application for leave to defend and decreeing the suit under 0. 37 Code of Civil Procedure, two following questions arise for decision :

(A) Whether the defendant ( i) who claimed set off/adjustment before filing the suit by making a request to sell goods pledged with the plaintiff - respondent; and (iii) who claimed adjustment of the amount of the value of the goods pledged, insured and kept under lock and key of the plaintiff-bank, which were subsequently burnt, is entitled to get leave to defend the suit. ?

(B) Whether revision petition itself is not maintainable in view of the composite order of rejection of application for leave to defend, followed by passing of decree, as an appeal could be filed ?

( 2 ) RELEVANT facts are as under : laxmi Commercial Bank Ltd. , plaintiff/ respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 17,000. 00 under Order 37, C. P. C. According to the Bank s case, on the request of defendant/ revision petitioner, cash credit facility to the limit of Rs. 12,000. 00 (bearing interest @ 9% above the RBI s rate of interest with a minimum of 17% per annum) was given, on execution of various

Click Here to Read the rest of this document