MANILAL GOVINDJI KHONA Vs. INDIAN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal impugns the order dated 1st August, 1997, which refused to grant any ad-interim Relief.

(2.) IN a suit filed by the Bank for recovery of a large amount, by order dated 9th December, 1996, the learned Single Judge passed a decree. Under the decree, which was passed as the defendants submitted to the same; the learned Judge directed that the rate of interest should be @ a 12% p. a. , instead of 18% p. a as claimed in the decree. The defendant was given time of six months to make the payment. Upon failure, the decree was to be as prayed for by the plaintiff Bank. The learned Judge also noted in the order that the defendant has not filed written statement. The defendant was to pay the decretal amount on or before 31st May, 1997. Upon failure of the defendant to pay the amount as directed not only the decree was to be in terms of prayer clause (a) as claimed by the Bank but also decree in terms of prayers (b), (c), (d) and (e ). Clause (e) which is relevant directed the immoveable properties, more particularly described in Exhibit "a" to the plaint, to be sold by the Commissioner for taking accounts or the Court Receiver by and under the decree and directions of this Court by public auction or by private treaty and the net sale proceeds thereof be applied in or towards the satisfaction of the plaintiffs decretal claim. Under Clause (d) sub-Clause (iv) the Receiver was to stand appointed as a Receiver in execution.

(3.) AS per the decree amount payable as on 31st May, 1997, comes to Rs. 1,35,25,349/ -. It is the case of the defendant that in fact he had been to the Bank with this amount. However, the Bank refused to receive the said amount. In these proceedings we are not concerned with that aspect because the same will be determined in the proceedings which are pending before the learned Judge.