JANAK PRAMODBHAI PATEL Vs. SEPCIAL RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts involved in all the captioned petitions are same, so is the issue. They thus constituted a group. They are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners, who are the guarantors to a loan transaction, have made the following prayers, common in all petitions.

(3.) The relevant facts may be stated in a nutshell. One Minal Oil & Agro Industries Limited, a private limited company had taken financial assistance for running its business from respondent No.2 Kalupur Commercial Co-operative Bank to the tune of Rs.250 lakhs. The amount of loan was not repaid and respondent No.2 Bank instituted Lavad Suit being 1886 of 2002. Award and decree came to be passed in the said Lavad Suit by the Board of Nominee, Ahmedabad, on 30th June, 2003. In the said Lavad Suit, respondent No.2 Bank was the plaintiff whereas Minal Oil & Agro Industries Private Limited was loanee - defendant No.1; defendant Nos.2 to 6 were the guarantors whom included petitioner of Special Civil Application No.419 of 2016 as defendant No.6, petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1260 of 2016 as defendant No.3, petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1081 of 2016 as defendant No.4 and petitioner of Special Civil Application No.1098 of 2016 as defendant No.5.