KRISHNA SINGH Vs. BRANCH MANAGER, SBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision is directed against the Order Dated 26.3.1996 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Talcher in Misc. Case No. 178 of 1992 arising out of Execution Case No. 2 of 1988.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows: The Petitioner is Judgment -debtor No. 3 in Money Suit No. 15 of 1986 filed by Opposite Party No. 1 -Bank for recovery of Rs. 1,70,447.69 ps. from Opposite Party No. 2. Said Opposite Party No. 2 applied for a Mid Term Loan to purchase a second -hand truck of 1975 Model. The Bank granted such loan and executed an agreement on 25.11.1980 for Mid; Term Loan with hypothecation of the vehicle. The present Petitioner is one of the guarantors in the said agreement As the loanee failed to re -pay the loan amount, the Bank filed the suit in the year 1986 for recovery of the same. The loanee and the other guarantor were set ex parte. The present Petitioner filed his written statement stating therein that his signature in the agreement was obtained fraudulently by the brother of the loanee as he was an employee of the Bank. He further stated that since the loan amount was insured with the Credit Guarantee Corporation of India (in short 'CGCI'), the CGCI is liable to pay 25 per cent of the loan amount. The suit was decreed against the loanee as well as the guarantors making them liable to pay the loan amount jointly and severally. The Bank filed execution case for executing the decree.

(3.) THE Learned Civil Judge after hearing the parties held that the money decree was passed against the Petitioner as he was a guarantor and the execution case was filed against him wherein he was Judgment debtor No. 3. It was further held by the Learned Civil Judge that the CGCI was not a party to the suit and since that was not challenged during pendency of the suit, in the execution case, the said point need not be gone into and the Petitioner has also not proved whether 75 per cent of the loan amount guaranteed by the CGCI had been deposited with the decree holder Bank and the same fact was not proved. Therefore, the said question should not be raised as an objection in the execution case. On the above finding, the Learned Civil Judge rejected the petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code.