Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Kanta Devi – Appellant
Versus
Punjab & Sind Bank – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J.
1. This is defendants appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.05.1993 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ropar dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.1989 passed by the Court of learned Sub-Judge, First Class, Kharar, vide which the suit filed by the Punjab & Sind Bank (plaintiff) for recovery of Rs. 35994/- was decreed.
2. For the sake of convenience and clarity, parties shall be referred to as per their original status.
3. The plaintiff (Punjab & Sind Bank) filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 35994/- including interest up to 05.02.1987 and future interest @14.5% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till realization against the defendants (Jagrotam Dass-defendant No.1 and G.S. Dhami-defendant No.2).
3.1. The case set up by the plaintiff was that on a request having been made by defendant No.1, a term loan of Rs.25000/- was advanced to defendant No.1 for the promotion of electrical business. Defendant No.1 executed and signed the requisite loan documents including promissory note, agreement of hypothecation and other documents on 07.02.1984. The loan was repayable along with interes
A suit filed against a deceased person is a nullity, but if it involves multiple parties, it may not abate; procedural lapses can be corrected to serve substantial justice.
The amendment to Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC aims to ensure the continuation and culmination of effective adjudication and to prevent the proceedings from coming to an end summarily due to the death....
Point of Law : Code of Civil Procedure enjoins various provisions only for the purpose of avoiding multiplicity of proceedings and for adjudicating of related disputes in the same proceedings, the pa....
A decree passed against a deceased party is null and void; proper procedure under Order 22 CPC must be followed to avoid automatic abatement.
Delay/Laches/ limitation - Sufficient cause – Meaning of - The expression ‘sufficient cause’ within the meaning of Section 5 of the Act or Order 22 Rule 9 of the Code or any other similar provision s....
The court affirmed that a plaintiff can substitute legal representatives and condone delay if unaware of a defendant's death, emphasizing good faith in procedural compliance.
The main legal point established is that the timely filing of applications under Order XXII Rule 4 and Rule 9 of the CPC is crucial, and delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause. Negligence ....
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
