PUNJAB AND SIND BANK Vs. MANJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is anapplication filed on behalf of the plaintiff bank under Order XXXIV Rule 5 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code (in short the 'Code') and in this application it has been prayed that a final decree of sale bepassed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant No. 1 and the immoveable property commonly known as M-47, Greater Kailash-l, New Delhi be directed to be sold and the sale proceeds be directed to be paid to the plaintiff for appropriation towards the decretal amount/satisfaction of the decree. Reply to this application has been filed on behalf of the defendant No. 1 and it has been stated therein that no final decree can be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant No. J with regard to property mentioned above and as such the question of selling the immovable property does not arise. It has further been stated in the reply that the present application is not maintainable as the defendants have taken steps to get the ex- parte decree set aside by way of proper application. It may, however, be pointed out here that the application filed on behalfofthe defendants for setting aside ex-parte decree (IA 3259/92) has already been dismissd by my order dated 12th November, 1993 .

(2.) Mr. Amar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff drew my attention to the preliminary decree passed under Order 34 Rule 4 of the Code by this Court on 7th August, 1990. The relevant portion from the judgement is reporduced here inbelow:-

(3.) Learned counsel submitted that since the defendant No. 1 has failed to pay the decretal amount alongwith interest, a final decree for the sale of mortgaged property be passed and further directions as prayed in the application he also issued.