(1.) THIS is a regular second appeal filed under Section 100 read with Order 41 & 42 and 151 CPC against the judgment dated 16.8.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge dismissing the appeal being R.C.A. No.4/2011 titled M/s. Novapharm Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. & Others vs. Sanjesh Darbari.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent herein filed a suit bearing No.14/2008 against M/s. Novapharm Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. and its two Directors for recovery of Rs.2,46,746/- along with interest @ 18 per cent per annum and costs.
(3.) THE defendants/appellants filed their written statement and contested the claim. The main question which was raised by the defendants/appellants in the written statement was that there was no privity of contract. After completion of the pleadings, the plaintiff/respondent filed an application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC for passing the judgment on the basis of admission. The arguments were heard on the application and the learned trial court came to the conclusion that there was an admission purported to have been made by the defendants/appellants that the amount of Rs.2,46,746/- was deducted from the fixed deposit of the plaintiff/respondent on account of overdraft limit having not being settled by them with the Bank of Punjab in question. So far as the plea of privity of contract is concerned, the learned trial court observed that there was no absence of privity of contract for the simple reason that it is not disputed by the plaintiff/respondent that he had appeared and furnished surety by way of fixed deposit for availing of overdraft facility by the defendant/appellant No.1 company and its two Directors, who were operating the account. Therefore, this plea of absence of privity of contract was discarded by the court and a decree for the aforesaid amount along with interest was passed by the trial court against the defendants/appellants and in favour of the plaintiff/respondent on 24.1.2011.