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

1985 Supreme(Guj) 56

R.A.MEHTA, A.P.RAVANI
BANK OF BARODA – Appellant
Versus
TIGER ELECT. MOTORS COMPANY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: RAMESH M.DESAI, S.K.BUKHARI

R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by the original plaintiff (Bank of Baroda) is directed against the judgment and decree which reads as under ;"defendants do pay Rs. 3 78 56. 41 with 9% interest from date of suit i. e. 26-9-78 till realisation with cost of suit in 10 equal annual instalments commencing from 1-1-84 with the condition that if they failed to pay any one instalment the plaintiff shall be at liberty to recover the remaining whole amount at a time". The plaintiff is at liberty to recover the decretal amount by sale of hypothecated and mortgaged properties. The plaintiff Bank is aggrieved by the direction in the decree regarding instalments as well as interest rate which is less than the contractual rate of interest.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT-DEFENDANT No. 1 is the principal debtor a Private Limited Co. Respondent No. 3 has been deleted. Respondents Nos. 2 4 and 5 are the Directors of the principal debtor Private Limited Co. and are also the guarantors. Respondent No. 2 seems to be a past director but he has also given a guarantee and that also continues. All the defendants have been held liable for the decretal amount. The suit was not a simple money suit. It was suit for recover













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