STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA Vs. SIDDAR MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is brought to the notice of the Court that the 1st defendant arrayed as 1st respondent in this petition who had remained ex parte had been dispensed with the issuance of notice in this revision.

(2.) THIS Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 18 of the Small Causes Courts Act, by the 2nd defendant in the suit is directed against the order and decree dated 22. 8. 2000 passed by the Court of Small Causes, (SCCH 17) Bangalore in Small Cause Suit No. 3560/ 1998 on its file.

(3.) THE Trial Court in the said suit though decreed the suit as sought for by the plaintiff which had been filed against two defendants namely, one Siddar Murthy arrayed as defendant 1 and the state Bank of Saurashtra arrayed as 2nd defendant, the said suit was decreed only as against the 2nd defendant and dismissed as against the 1st defendant. It is aggrieved by this order and decree in decreeing the suit only as against the 2nd defendant, the 2nd defendant is in revision before this Court.