SKYLARK MOTORS (INDIA) Vs. LAKSHMI COMMERCIAL BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision petition directed against a composite order rejecting application for leave to defend and decreeing the suit under Order 37 Code of Civil Procedure, two following questions arise for decision :

(2.) RELEVANT facts are as under :

(3.) THE respondent-Bank in their reply to the application for leave to defend admitted burning of the pledged goods. But they claimed that the Bank could not be blamed for it as they had taken all due care and fire was on account of acts beyond their power and control. Claim had been lodged with the Insurance Company. The Bank further claimed that a notice of demand demanding Rs. 15,860/- was sent in August, 1981 through Baxi Vikram Singh Sahni, Advocate. In reply to the said notice, petitioner/defendant admitted the claim of the Bank regarding a sum of Rs. 15,860/- and promised to pay the same in monthly instalments. The respondent-Bank also contended that the defendant was at liberty to have the pledged goods redeemed after paying the amount claimed by the plaintiff/respondent.