Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
LOKESHWAR PRASAD
State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Sudesh Pruthi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Lokeshwar Prasad, J.
1. The plaintiff, named above, has filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs. 1.72,845.39 against the defendants averring that the plaintiff Bank is a body Corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Bombay with local Head Office at 11, Parliament Street, New Delhi and amongst others a branch office at East Patel Nagar, New Delhi, under the control of the local Head Office situated at Parliament Street, New Delhi and that Shri S K. Chowdhary, Branch Manager/Principal Officer of the plaintiff Bank is duly authorised to sign and verify the plaint and to file the present suit on behalf of the plaintiff in terms of General Regulations, 1955, made by the Reserve Bank of India in exercise of powers conferred by Sub- section 50 (3) of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government read with the notifications published in the Gazette of India dated the 26th September, 1955 and 26th August, 1972.
1.1. It is alleged that defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiff Bank and made an application dated the 3rd January, 1982 for medium term loa
The surety's liability persists despite creditor actions that do not impair the security, as established in the guarantee deed.
The court upheld the validity of the suit promissory note and found that the evidence on record proved the defendant's liability to repay the borrowed amount, leading to the decree in favor of the pl....
The court ruled it lacked jurisdiction over the case and returned the plaint for re-filing in the appropriate venue.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
