LINK AUTOMOBILES Vs. STATE BANK OF INDORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 1.10.1991 passed by the fifth Addl. Judge to the Court of District Judge, Indore in C. O.S. No. 3-B of 91, whereby the prayer of the non-applicant Bank made under Order 38, Rule 5 Civil Procedure Code and Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code has been disallowed; instead a direction has been given to the present petitioner to furnish security of Rs. 4,00,000/- (four lacs) for the due performance of the decree which may be finally passed against the present petitioner. Aggrieved by the condition directing the petitioner to furnish security, this revision petition has been filed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner Shri A.K. Sethi, strenuously argued that once the Court has come to a conclusion that no case under Order 38, Rule 5 Civil Procedure Code or Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code has been made out, the Court had no jurisdiction to impose a condition for furnishing security because a prima facie case has not been made out by the plaintiffs before the lower Court.

(3.) On the other hand the learned Counsel or the Bank Shri Zelawat argues that the order has been passed by the lower Court to safeguard the interest of the plaintiff as well as not to put the present petitioner-defendant in an uncomfortable position which would arise in the event of an attachment before judgment. Therefore, the order being equitable and it having not caused any injustice to any of the parties no interference should be made.