PUNJAB SIND BANK Vs. MAHINDER SINGH MANJIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff bank has filed this suit for recovery of Rs. 3,88,507.55 against the defendant No. I firm and three partners defendants 2 to 4.

(2.) Briefly stated the case of the plaintiff is this. The defendants 2 to 4 being the partners or defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiff bank on 14.1.84 and opened an account and requested overdraft facility in the current account and adhoc/casual basis. The overdraft facility was allowed Subsequently, on 28.8.85 the defendants confirmed the debit balance in their account at Rs. 4.56.755 80. In December 1985 the defendants 2 to 4 requested for a temporary overdraft facility to the extent of Rs. 4 lakhs. This request was also acceded to by the plaintiff. On 23rd of December 1985 they executed the following documents :- 1. Demand Promissory Note. 2. Form No 106 3. Form No 291 4. Form No 216 5. Form No, 126 6. Form No. 159 After giving credits to the amounts paid by the defendants, the plaintiff bank issued notice calling upon them to pay the balance due. The balance as on February 16, 1987 was Rs. 3,88,507.55. The plaintiff claims interest at 17.5% per annum with quarterly rests. According to plaintiff, the defendants undertook to pay an additional interest of 2.5% in case of delay or default in payment. In the written statement, a very curious point is taken by the defendant stating that they did not ask for any overdraft facility from the bank and no money was payable by the defendants to the plaintiff. They also state that some moneys were paid to Mr. Anand, an officer of the bank, who was very cordial with the defendants and payments made by the defendants to Mr. Anand had not been deposited by him into the bank and he had cheated them. In the preliminary objections in paragraph 6, it is stated as follows

(3.) The plaintiff filed a replication repudiating the claim of the defendants.