O P BHARTIA Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two F. A. 0s. (OS) 72/88 & 97/88 arise out of the judgment dated May 27, 1988 of the learned Single Judge of this Court and are disposed of by the common judgment.

(2.) . The facts in brief are these. Canara Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) filed suit No. 1793/84 on October 31, 1984 against M/s Fibre Processors Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company) and others for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 11, 98, 449.72 together with interest etc. The Bank filed yet another suit on October 31, 1984, being suit No. 1810/84 for the recovery of a sum of Rs 49,32,803.61 with interest. It was alleged in this suit that the Company bad for the grant of loaning facilities and to secure repayment of the loans had executed several documents and hypothecated the plant and machinery of the factory of the Company, raw materials and finished goods etc. In favour of the Bank and the Bank is entitled to recover its dues from the hypothecated plant, machinery, raw materials and finished goods etc. The Bank filed on November 7, 1984 another suit No. 1754/84 for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,58,907.85 together with interest etc. Along with suit No. 1793/84, an application, being 1.A. 2596/85 under order 40 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of a Receiver was made. The power sought for the Receiver was to take possession of all the plant, machinery, tools, accessories, raw materials, goods in process, stores and spares, finished goods and other items whatsoever and for a direction to the Receiver to sell the plant, machinery, raw materials and finished goods and other items lying in the factory premises of the Company. In suit: No. 1810/84, similar relief was claimed in I.A. 1837/85.

(3.) . Insuit No. 1793/84, the summons of tb.e suit were sent to the defendants including the Company at its Faridabad address and it was reported that the Company refused to accept service and, therefore, a copy of the summons was affixed at the spot. The service was deemed as sufficient and as none was present on behalf of defendant No. 1, the proceedings were taken ex pane against the Company in the Court's order dated February 19, 1985. The other defendants in the suit were duly served and were represented. I.A. 2596/85 in suit 1793/84 for appointment of the Receiver was allowed by G.R. Luthra.J. the learned Single Judge in the order dated May 28, 1985. The Court appointed Shri S.K.Prakash Naik, Manager, Legal Section, Circle Officer, Parliament Street, New Delhi of the Bank as the sole Receiver with all the powers under Order 40 ofthe Code of Civil Procedure. The order of the appointment of the Receiver in suit No. 1793/84 was extended to suit No. 1810/84 and it was directed that the Receiver would also work for the purpose of that suit also. The Company had not been served in suit No. 1810/84 and orders were made for its substituted service by way of publication in the "Statesman", Delhi and Calcutta, The rest of the proceedings were recorded in suit No. 1810/84.