INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. H S CHANDRASHEKAR MAJOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the respective counsel. The Indian Overseas Bank is the petitioneer aggrieved by the order passed on the application filed under Order 9, Rule 13 setting aside the decree dated 31-8-1989 in 1997 at the instance of the surety, the 2nd defendant on the ground that the surety signature has been forged on all the documents including the Court records, suit summons as well as the Bank records.

(2.) THE learned Judge has chosen to accept the version of the surety and set aside the decree in its entirety. It is that order challenged before me in this C. R. P.

(3.) BASICALLY, the order passed by the Court below is not sustainable as the Court has no jurisdiction to set aside the decree as against the first defendant, the main borrower. If at all, the decree can be set aside only as against the surety who come forward with the grievance. On this ground alone this order has to be set aside.