LALA RAM CHANDRA SINGH Vs. SASIBALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFFS are appellants from an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, bhubaneswar, whereby the plaint was directed to be returned to the plaintiffs for prosecution in proper Court on the ground that the Subordinate Judge has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit because one of the defendants in the suit is a liquidator of Puri Bank.

(2.) THE matter arises thus -- On March 1, 1949 defendants 1 and 2 executed a mortgage bond in favour of the plaintiffs' father for Rs. 300/ -. Puri Bank had obtained a money decree against the mortgagors (defendants 1 and 2 ). In execution of the said money decree the mortgaged properties were put to sale at the instance of Puri Bank in Execution Case No. 14 of 1951. On April 16, 1960 defendant No. 4 purchased the property in execution sale. On February 27, 1962 a mortgage suit was filed by the plaintiffs-mortgagees against the legal representatives of the mortgagors, purchaser in execution sale defendant No. 4 and attaching creditor Puri Bank defendant No. 3. In the mortgage suit Puri Bank took the defence that it is not a necessary party in the mortgage suit. The learned subordinate Judge decided that the Subordinate Judge has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the plaint was returned to the plaintiffs for presentation in proper Court. The legal position on which the question of jurisdiction was decided as aforesaid is that under the Banking Companies Act, the High Court alone has exclusive jurisdiction in all matters in which a claim is made by or against Banking company which is being wound up. It is not disputed that Puri Bank is now under liquidation. The learned trial Court however did not decide the issue as to whether puri Bank defendant No. 3 is a necessary party to the suit.

(3.) THE plaintiff's contention in this appeal is that Puri Bank is not a necessary party as no relief can be claimed against Puri Bank who accordingly should be expunged from the suit. The plaintiffs' point is that if defendant Puri Bank is expunged then the Subordinate Judge will have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The plaintiffs also filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code for expunging the name of defendant No. 3 Puri Bank from the suit and for remand of the suit to the subordinate Judge for decision according to law.