COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party filed Money Suit No. 31 of 1985 against the present petitioners for realisation of Rs, 15,15,915.84 paise. During the pendency of the suit, the opposite party filed an application seeking permission of the Court to sell away the raw materials and machineries of the petitioners industry which had been given by way of pledge to the Bank. The said application was rejected. Civil Revision No. 805 of 1987 filed by the plaintiff against the aforesaid order was dismissed by the High Court by order dated 11.7.1990. Therefore, the suit was decreed ex parte on 13.3.1994 and the defendant- petitioners were directed to pay up the decretal amount within three months failing which the plaintiff was permitted to realise the amount through process of law. Thereafter, the present petitioners filed Misc. Case No, 127 of 1994 under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the CPC') to set aside the ex parte decree and the said petition is still pending before the trial Court.

(2.) While the matter stood thus the opposite party published a notice in the daily 'Samaj for auction sale of raw materials and other finished products of the industry. The present petitioners filed an application under Order 3.9, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, CPC, before the trial Court to injunct the opposite party from holding such auction and the matter was fixed to 27.10.1995 for hearing. At that stage the opposite party sought for adjournment and the case was fixed to 17.11.1995 for hearing on the question of injunction and after completion of hearing the matter was posted to 27.11.1995 for pronouncement of the order. Hpwever, without waiting for the order, the opposite party sold the raw materials and other products to one Jayant Kumar Das of Balasore. It is alleged by the petitioners that the aforesaid sale took place in a clandestine and dubious manner and no other bidder except Jayant.Kumar Das had participated. It is further alleged that the finished products and. the raw materials were sold on weight basis for a paltry sum of Rs. 8,32,600/-. According to the petitioners, the property if sold on piece basis would have fetched about Rs, 25,00,000/-. After such sale was effected, the counsel for the opposite party filed a memo on 22.11.1995 stating that the goods had already been disposed of by the bank and, thereafter, the trial Court rejected the application of the petitioners for injunction as being infructuous.

(3.) The petitioners have filed this revision against the order dated 27.11.1995 wherein the trial Court rejected the application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC as infructuous. The learned eounsel for the opposite party- Bank, has justified the action of the Bank by stating that since the property had been pledged with the Bank, it had the absolute right to sell the pledged property. The learned counsel for the petitioners has however combated this position and submitted that the sale was completely illegal.