BANK OF INDIA Vs. WINSTON VAZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Madon hands over compilation of the (i) dates and events and (ii) copies of three judgments and/or orders of this Court. Mr. Vishwanath for the judgment debtor refuses to accept copy thereof. Compilation given to the Court is taken on record. Objection not to do so is overruled.

(2.) Affidavit of the judgment debtor taken on record and matter heard on the footing of denial by the judgment creditor. For reasons to follow, judgment debtors request for leading evidence is rejected. Judgment creditor is not called upon to lead evidence.

(3.) Contentions raised on behalf of the judgment debtor are on par with those raised by the same learned Counsel on behalf of the judgment debtors brother in similar proceedings. These contentions, I am constrained to say, are but a continuation of the process of abuse of the Court initiated earlier and characterized as such by the Division Bench in the former proceedings. Facts are eloquent. The judgment creditor-Bank of Indias Summary Suit No. 1428 of 1982 inter alia against the present judgment debtor Winston and his brother Mario and their father Mark was decreed ex parte on 11th October, 1982. Motion for setting aside the said decree was dismissed. There was no challenge to the said dismissal. Insolvency notice was thereafter served on the judgment debtor but to no avail. The judgment creditor then filed three insolvency petitions viz., one against the present judgment debtor, one against his brother Mario and one against their father Mark. Notice of motion for setting aside the insolvency notice was dismissed. In the meanwhile all these three person viz., the present judgment debtor, his brother Mario and their father Mark filed Suit No. 1258 of 1984 for setting aside the decree supra. Notice of motion taken out therein inter alia for stay of the insolvency proceedings was also dismissed. The present judgment debtors brother Mario was then adjudicated insolvent in September 1985. His appeal there from failed. The matter is now before the Supreme Court at the stage of special leave petition.