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

1991 Supreme(Del) 55

D.P.WADHWA
RAJENDRA SETHIA – Appellant
Versus
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Atul Sharma, LALIT BHASIN, P.N.LEKHI, S.K.KHANNA, SANDIP AGARWAL

D. P. Wadhwa

( 1 ) PLAINTIFF sued Punjab National Bank for directing it to give details about its settlement with liquidators of pff s. company; for injunction restraining Deft. from enforcing settlement and for not implementing the settlement without his concurrence as he was guarantor. Pff. made applications for amendment of plaint and also for addition of certain parties (U. O. I. , Reserve Bank and some of his English Companies ). Deft. also filed an application contending that pff. had no locus standi to file the suit and that the Delhi Courts had no jurisdiction. Pff. wanted to add U. O. I, and RBI as parties as Deft. had sought their permission to enter into settlement with the Liquidator Trustees of Jokai Tea Co. (L.) whose shares had been pledged with Deft. The contention of the Deft. was that pff. had been adjudged as Bankrupt by English Courts and he could not sue in India. Pff s plea was that lie was never given opportunity to defend himself in English Courts as at relevant time he was in Jail in India. About making UOI and RBI parties, plea of pff. was that Finance Minister had stated in Parliament that report of RBI would be placed on the table of the house which was n










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