VALJIBHAI JETHABHAI VORA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed challenging an order passed below Exh.16 in Regular Civil Suit No.858 of 2020, dtd. 15/7/2022 passed by 8th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar, whereby application filed by the petitioners - plaintiffs to recast issues came to be rejected.

(2.) The petitioners - plaintiffs claimed to be share-holders of the State Bank of India and thereby, co-owners of the same and therefore, claiming to be public spirited citizen filed a suit claiming several reliefs challenging selection of a place for opening up bank branch without issuance of tenders, selection of tender of defendant no.5, who is son of defendant no.4 and so on, said action without jurisdiction claiming to recover the amount wasted towards the same to be recovered from the defendant nos.4 and 5 with interest.

(3.) As appears from the order impugned, the defendants were served with the summons. Defendant nos.4 and 5 after appearance did not remain present either personally or through an advocate, their right to file written statement came to be closed, whereas, defendant nos.1 to 3 appeared before the Court through defendant no.3 appointing an advocate. On behalf of defendant nos.1 to 3, a written statement came to be filed on 16/4/2021. Since no authority letter or resolution passed by defendant nos.1 and 2 empowering the defendant no.3 to represent them, as claimed by the petitioners - plaintiffs, produced either to engage an advocate or filing reply vide Exh.14 application petitioners - plaintiffs prayed for proceeding ex-parte against defendant nos.1 and 2. However, right of defendants to reply Exh.14 application came to be closed after hearing the petitioners - plaintiffs. However, the said Exh.14 application appears to be rejected by the Court as it involves the question of leading evidence.