DELHI HIGH COURT
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, JJ.R.MIDHA
J.K. Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
Bank of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.(Oral)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The appellant was undoubtedly a guarantor in respect of a loan advanced to defendant No.1 by respondent No.1 who was the plaintiff. In respect of the loan, defendants No.2 and 3 as also the appellant, impleaded as defendant No.4, stood guarantee for repayment.
3. The suit has been decreed in sum of Rs.7,84,415/- together with pendente lite and future interest @ 18.5% per annum from date of suit till realization.
4. We may note that the principal borrower i.e. defendant No.1 and co-defendants No.2 and 3 have not challenged the decree. Only the appellant is in appeal.
5. The statement of account on which the suit was based has been proved as Ex.P-13. The same reads as under:
| Date | Particulars | Debits | Cr. Or Dr. | Credits Balance |
| 10/12/97 | By Balance/Totals as per last statement Brought Forward (To loan disburse) | 25,00,000 | Dr. | 25,00,000 |
| 01/01/98 | To intt upto 31.12.1997 | 18,443.64 | ||
| 26/03/98 | To intt upto 26.03.1998 | 71,785.96 | ||
| 27/03/98 | By Transfer | 12,960 | ||
| 29/07/98 | To intt upto 31.07.1998 | 2,29,633 | ||
| 30/09/98 | To intt upto 24.09.1998 | 74,644 | ||
| 23/12/98 | By Transfer | 10,000 | ||
| 29/12/98 | To pay slip issued for search in ROC | 750 | ||
| 1/11/99 | By Transfer | 30,0 | ||
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.