KIRANJIT SINGH Vs. MADAN LAL KHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.l4,62,000.00 with interest pendente life and future interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum. Though initially the suit was filed as an ordinary one, the plaintiff moved an application bearing IA No. 1390/92 under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') for amendment of the plaint and prayed that the suit be treated as one under Order 37 of the Code. The said application was allowed and the suit has been treated as one under Order 37 of the Code.

(2.) After the service of the summons Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate put in appearance on behalf of the defendant before the Joint Registrar on 25th May, 1992. He also undertook to file power of attorney along with memo of appearance shortly.

(3.) In terms of order dated 23rd November, 1992 passed by the Joint Registrar, summons for judgment issued against the defendant for 27th September, 1992 were duly served on the said defendant on 24th August, 1992. Since no application for leave to defend the suit was filed by the defendant within the statutory period, the case was fixed before the Court on 2nd March, 1993, on which date the learned counsel for the plaintiff prayed for time to file the receipts alongwith an affidavit and the case was adjourned to 14th April, 1993. The case was, however, taken up on 15th April, 1993 and since none appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, the case was adjourned to 13thJuly, 1993. Meanwhile, an application bearing IA No.4409/93 under section 151 of the Code for preponing the date of hearing was filed on behalf of the plaintiff and this application was allowed on 30th April, 1993 and the hearing of the case was preponed to 6th July, 1993 but on 6th July, 1993 the case was adjourned to 13th July, 1993. On 13th July, 1993 Mr.Vinod Kumar, the learned counsel for the defendant appeared and submitted that he wanted to examine the court records regarding service on the defendant and the case was adjourned to 19th July, 1993. On 19th July, 1993 the case was adjourned to 20th July, 1993. On 20th July, 1993 the defendant appeared in person and submitted that he was moving an application for setting aside the order dated 5th January, 1993 passed against him in the matter. Since as per the report, the defendant had been served through affixation by the High Court Process Agency on 24th August, 1992 and inspite of the fact that the learned counsel had appeared or behalf of the defendant in Court on 13th July, 1993 but no application had been filed so far, I adjourned the case to 5th August, 1993 subject to the condition that the defendant would furnish a bank guarantee of a nationalised bank for the sum ofRs.l4,62,000.00 within two weeks. In the order passed on 20th July, 1993 it was made clear that in case the bank guarantee is not furnished within two weeks, no further opportunity will begiven to the defendant and the arguments will be heard on the date fixed.