INDBANK MERCHANT BANKING SERVICES LIMITED Vs. KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit by plaintiff Bank for recovery of money under the Lease Finance Agreement. The amount claimed by the Bank is approximately Rs.1,83,00,000/-. It seems to be almost an admitted position that the defendants made defaults in payment of lease rentals, cheques given by the defendants have been dishonoured. Hence, Bank is claiming for Receiver and injunction.

(2.) MR .Hegde raised an issue relating to jurisdiction of this Court. According to Mr.Hegde under the lease finance agreements only Court at Madras has jurisdiction to try the suit. On the other hand, Mr.Dhru, counsel for the bank states that the defendants have got a branch office at Bombay. He also points out that the cheques were delivered to the Bank at Mumbai. Therefore, according to Mr.Dhru, this Court has ample jurisdiction to try the present suit. In support of his submission Mr.Dhru has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Patel Roadways Ltd v/s. Prasad Trading Co. (1992) Vol 74, Company Cases 11 (SC). He also relied on a decision of Madras High Court in Lakshmi Mills Co. Ltd & Anr vs. Kalpaka Transport Co. (P) Ltd. 1995 Vol 83 Comp Cases 146.

(3.) MR .Hedge submitted that a wrong agreement has been annexed to the plaint. According to Mr.Hegde, the plaintiff wanted to mislead this Court. Atleast prima facie, I am not impressed with this submission. It seems to be a bonafide mistake on the part of the Bank.