UNION OF INDIA Vs. SONYWELL ELECTRONICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is a statutory banking company constituted under Banking "Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. This suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 5,69,670.32 against five defendants. The defendant No.1 is a partnership firm of which defendants 2 and 3 are partners. Defendants 4 and 5 are stated to be the guarantors. The suit is being contested by the defendant No.2 only. It already stands decreed against defendants 1 and 3 to 5. In fact suit was filed by the plaintiff bank under the provisions of Order XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure. Only defendant No.2 had filed application for leave to defend. There was no appearance entered on behalf of defendants 1 and 3 to 5 and for this reason suit was decreed against defendants 1 and 3 to 5 by Judgement and decree dated December 5,1988. On an application for leave to defend filed by defendant No.2 order dated April 3,1991 was passed granting limited leave to defend. This was an agreed order which reads as under:

(2.) In view of the aforesaid order as defendant No.2 was granted limited leave to defend after the pleadings the following issues were framed on 26.8.1997:

(3.) Thus, the question to be decided is as to whether balance confirmation dated July 1, 1981 is not binding on defendant No.2? If it is so held, necessary consequences would be that the suit against defendant No.2 would be barred by limitation and plaintiff, in that eventuality would not be entitled' any relief against defendant No.2 in the suit.