INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. A B SENAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Indian Overseas Bank, Thiruvananthapuram is the revision petitioner. It obtained a decree against respondents 1 and 2 for money along with K.R.L. Engineering & Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. In execution when the Bank sought to proceed against the properties belonging to the respondents, respondents filed E.A. 867/1992 for a direction that they are not personally liable for the decree amount and hence their property cannot be sold in auction. The Court below, by the impugned order, has held that the suit was filed for getting certain amounts from the first defendant, which is a Pvt. Limited Co., Respondents 1 and 2, who were defendants 2 and 3, were only Managing Director and Director respectively. Unless any fraudulent act was pleaded, no personal liability can be tacked on to respondents 1 and 2. In the above view of the matter, the Court below held that judgment debtors 2 and 3 cannot be personally proceeded against It is against that the present C.R.P. is filed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri. Chacko George contended before me that if the decree is perused, it would show that the decree is passed against all the three defendants viz., M/s. K.R.L. Engineering & Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. A.B. Senan, Managing Director and K.R. Lalithambika, Director. The decree is as follows:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents Shri. G.S. Raghunath brought to my notice the decision of the Orissa High Court in Hrushikesh Panda v. Indramani Swain, AIR 1987 Orissa 79. In that case, a Division Bench of the Orissa High Court held as follows: