NEW BANK OF INDIA Vs. MUKESH AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff had instituted this suit for recovery of Rs. 1,68,041.05 together with pendente lite and future interest @19.5% per annum. The plaintiff had also prayed for pledged goods being attached and put to sale for realisation of the decretal amount.

(2.) The defendants were duly served and have filed their written statement. Vide order dated 10th April, 1985, in view of the defence taken by the defendants, the defendants were directed to file counter-statement of accounts. This order was not complied with. The defendants were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 23rd August, 1985. However, the ex parte order was set aside on 24th September, 1985. The following issues were framed on 4th October, 1985.

(3.) The case was directed to be fixed for trial on 30th April, 1996. On the said date, : one PW was examined on behalf of the plaintiff Bank and the plaintiff closed its evidence. As none was present on behalf of the defendants to cross-examine the PW, their right to cross-examine the PW was closed. Counsel for the defendants appeared on 22nd August, 1996 and submitted that he would be moving an appropriate application since evidence had been recorded. On 14th January, 1998, the application moved under Order 9, Rule 7, Civil Procedure Code by the defendant was dismissed. However, the defendants were accorded an opportunity to lead their evidence. Learned Counsel for the defendants undertook to produce the witnesses on his own: The defendants were not present on 8th October, 1998 and evidence of the defendants was closed. It is, in these circumstances, that the suit was directed to be listed for disposal in the category of 'short cause'.