SUKHWINDER SINGH Vs. UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 3.2.2010 passed by the learned Court below whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for clubbing of suit filed by him for issuance of No Dues Certificate by the bank on the plea that he had cleared the loan raised by him for purchase of tractor, along with the suit filed by the bank for recovery of the balance amount of loan advanced for purchase of tractor, was declined.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit filed by the bank was subsequent in time as compared to the suit which was filed by the petitioner. He filed the same on February 25, 2003 whereas the suit by the bank was filed on August 14, 2003. As the relief claimed in both the suits is relating to the loan raised by the petitioner and in case the trial in both the suits is not clubbed, the same may lead to contradictory judgments.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. It is not in dispute that both the suits were filed way back in the year 2003. Seven years have passed by and till date neither application was filed by the petitioner for stay of the suit if the argument is that the relief claimed by the bank in the subsequent suit filed by it against the petitioner was the same nor even the prayer was made for clubbing of the suits. Learned Court below has mentioned in the impugned order that the suit filed by the bank against the petitioner is at the stage of rebuttal and arguments whereas in the suit filed by the petitioner even evidence of the plaintiff is not complete. Meaning thereby if at this late stage the trial of both the suits is clubbed that would unnecessarily delay the disposal of the suit which is nearly completion. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The prayer for clubbing of the suits at this late stage is declined. The petition is dismissed.