BISWAMBHAR ACHARYA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for a direction to opposite party No. 1 (respondent No. 1 in R.F.A. No. 51 of 2003) to release the STDRs with and/or the interest due on the STDRs.

(2.) HEARD Mr. V. Prithviraj, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Das appearing for the respondent -opposite party No. 1 and Mr. P. Chhinchani appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 -Opposite party Nos. 2 and 3.

(3.) THE appellant took a plea in the said suit that the respondent No. 1 Bank could not set off the aforesaid maturity value of Rs. 2,17,200/ -of the Special Term Deposits of the appellant. By the judgment and decree dated 31.1.2002, the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Koraput held that the set off of Rs. 2,17,200/ - by the respondent No. 1 bank was not legally tenable and decreed the entire claim of the respondent No. 1 bank for a sum of Rs. 3,99,940/ - inclusive of interest calculated upto 8.2.1994 as per agreed rate and also for pendente lite and future interest. By the said judgment and decree while declaring the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as jointly and severally liable to pay the decretal dues to the respondent No. 1, the learned Civil Judge ordered that the decretal dues shall be paid to the respondent No. 1 bank within a period of two months from the date of decree and in the event of non -payment, the respondent No. 1 bank shall put the hypothecated and mortgaged property for sale towards realization of the decretal dues. The learned Civil Judge further ordered by the impugned judgment and decree that the respondent No. 1 bank shall first put the suit unit to sale and in the event the sale proceeds are found inadequate the respondent No. 1 bank shall put Schedule -A properties to sale and in the event the sale proceeds too are found insufficient the respondent No. 1 bank shall put the Schedule -B property to sale and in the event the sale proceeds of all such immovable properties are found to be insufficient to meet the respondent No. 1 bank's dues, the respondent No. 1 bank shall thereafter apply to the Court for personal decree against the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for realizing the balance outstanding dues. - - - -