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

2018 Supreme(Del) 203

PRATHIBA M.SINGH
HDFC BANK LTD – Appellant
Versus
SUHRIT SERVICES PVT LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

CM APPL. 3036/2017 (delay)

1. Delay is condoned subject to costs of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. CM is disposed of.

RFA 90/2017

2. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dated 9th May, 2016 by which the suit filed by HDFC Bank - Appellant/Plaintiff (hereinafter, 'Plaintiff') against the Defendants/Respondents (hereinafter, 'Defendants') was dismissed on the ground that the provisions of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter, ‘Evidence Act') were not complied with.

3. Briefly stated - a suit for recovery was filed seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.8,26,397/- against the Defendant Nos.1 & 2. Defendant No.1 was borrower and Defendant No.2 was co-borrower. Defendant No.1 had applied for a loan of Rs.15 Lakhs. He entered into a loan agreement/credit facility application form with the Bank. The original loan agreement is exhibited as Ex.PW-1/2 on record. The Bank had disbursed a loan of Rs.15 Lakhs to the Defendants in terms of the loan agreement no.11216814 dated 1st March, 2007. The Defendants had to repay the loan in equal monthly instalments out of which some insta






































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