CHIRANJILAL Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated August 23, 1989, passed by the Eighth Additional Judge in the court of the District Judge, Indore, in C. S. No. 3 of 1989 whereby the lower court has directed the present applicant to produce the truck before the court for attachment and sale.

(2.) THE facts leading to this revision petition, in short, are that the non-applicant, the Central Bank of India, filed a suit for recovery of loan against the applicant and his guarantor. Along with the suit the non-applicant also filed an application under Order 39, Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code, for interim sale of truck No. CPO 7868 on the ground that the truck was hypothecated with the bank. The present applicant denied the fact of the pledge of the truck with the bank, but the trial court was satisfied that the truck was pledged with the bank and hence passed the impugned order. Hence, this revision petition.

(3.) ON a perusal of the order impugned I find that the learned lower court has taken into consideration the facts that, prima facie, a loan of Rs. 3,00,000 was taken by the applicant from the bank on August 29, 1980, for purchase of three trucks and, at the time of obtaining the loan, the applicant entered into an agreement with the bank to pay Rs. 10,000 per month towards the payment of the principal and the interest, but he did not pay the amount as per the agreement, the truck is hypothecated with the bank in question. Therefore, the bank has a right to get the relief by way of attachment and sale of the truck.