Naren Advertising and Marketing vs State Bank of Saurashtra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
K.M. Mehta, J
Naren Advertising and Marketing – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of Saurashtra – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR AMAR N BHATT
For the Respondents: RULE SERVED

Table of Content
1. fraud involving forged signatures and the bank's negligence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. necessity of witness summons for a just trial. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. exercising discretion over procedural technicalities for justice. (Para 20 , 21)

JUDGEMENT

1.Naren Advertising and Marketing, a Partnership firm (original plaintiff No.1) and Narendra Chandulal Shah (original plaintiff No.2) who are also petitioners in this revision application have challenged the judgment and order dated 14th August, 2000 passed by the Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No.5962 of

1988. The learned Judge was please to reject the said application below Ex.54, by which plaintiffs have prayed for calling witness summons and production of other documents made therein as prayed for in this application.

2.The facts giving rise to this application are as under:-

2:1.The plaintiff No.1 is a partnership firm, registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 are the partners and plaintiff No.2 is a Managing Partner thereof. It appears from the record that from some time, the plaintiff - Firm has become also sole p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

GUJARAT HIGH COURTK.M. Mehta, JNaren Advertising and Marketing – AppellantVersusState Bank of Saurashtra – Respondent

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
K.M. Mehta, J
Naren Advertising and Marketing – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of Saurashtra – Respondent