GROVER LEASING LIMITED Vs. LML FIBRES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No person has a right to slow the process of law. Whenever such an attempt is made and it comes to the notice of the court the court would indeed use the long arm of law and not allow the person concerned to abuse the process of law. The facts of the present case would indeed indicate on the same lines. A civil suit had been filed by M/s Grover Leasing Ltd against the defendants including M/s LML Limited, defendant no.3, for recovery of Rs.10,97,895.00. On 20/9/1996 the learned counsel for defendant no.3 (Shri Nalin Talwar) had put in appearance and the Joint Registrar (O) directed that written statement by defendant no.3 be filed within six weeks. On 18/3/1997 the plaintiff was directed to supply copies of the last three documents to the learned counsel for defendant no.3 and this order was repeated on 9/7/1997. Written statement had still not been filed. On 17/9/1997 before the Joint Registrar (O) the learned counsel for the plaintiff pointed that copies of the documents have been sent to defendant no.3 but written statement had not been filed. Needless to mention that on 17/9/1997 there was no appearance on behalf of defendant no.3.

(2.) On 17/9/1998 once again the plaintiff was directed by Joint Registrar (O) to supply copies of the guarantee bond to the counsel for defendant no.3 within a week. The matter was adjourned For filing of the written statement of defendant no.3. On 14/5/1998, which was the next date of hearing before the Joint Registrar (O) written statement had still not been filed and that the said right has since been lost.

(3.) On behalf of defendant no.3 IA 4021/2000 has been preferred. Defendant no.3 has pleaded that on 14/12/1999 the plaintiff was to file the affidavit and the documents were to be exhibited and that on 15/2/2000 the Joint Registrar (O) had directed the plaintiff shall take steps to summon the documents from the bank and affidavit by way of ex parte evidence was to be filed.