PUNJAB AND SIND BANK Vs. LAXMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the plaintiff Bank challenging the judgment of the Trial Court where by the Trial Court has held that the suit against the guarantor is barred by limitation. Trial Court has decreed the suit against the borrower-respondent No. 1 and dismissed the suit against the guarantor as well as legal representatives against another guarantor.

(2.) COUNSEL for the appellant submitted that the Trial Court has recorded a finding that original agreement was executed on 24. 6. 1981 and thereafter Laxmansingh (borrower), has acknowledged the debt on 13. 3. 1984. Subsequent revival note was executed on 2. 3. 1987. Suit was filed within three years from 2. 3. 1987. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Trial Court has committed an error in holding that since the revival letter was signed by the borrower Laxmansingh only, therefore, limitation will not be extended to the guarantors. He submitted that this finding is contrary to law and contrary to the provisions of Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kailash Nath Agrawal v. Pradeshiya Industries and Investment Corporation of U. P. ,. , AIR2003 SC 1886 , II (2003 )BC296 (SC ), (2003 )3 Complj103 (SC ), JT2003 (2 )SC 115 , 2003 (2 )SCALE160 , (2003 )4 SCC305 , [2003 ]1 SCR1159 , (2003 )2 UPLBEC1198.

(3.) COUNSEL for the respondents submitted that since other respondents are not served, therefore, it is necessary to hear other respondents.