STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. NIRMALA KAUSHIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged order dated 15.11.2010 by which application filed under order IX Rule 13 of the CPC by the respondent has been allowed.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that it filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 9,10,485.20 P. due as on 17.4.1990 against the firm M/s Quality Box Makers [for short 'the firm'] and seven other defendants. The respondent (Nirmala Kaushik) is admittedly a partner in the firm and was impleaded as a party in the suit as defendant No.6. The suit was contested by defendant nos.2, 3 and 8 by filing their joint written statement. The other defendants did not appear despite service and were proceeded against ex parte.

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit on 14.1.1997 to the tune of Rs. 9,10,482.20 P along with interest @ 15% per annum from the date of filing of the suit. Since, the trial Court passed a simple money decree to the effect that "the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and is hereby decreed to the tune of Rs. 9,10,485.20 paise with costs and interest @ 15% P.A. from the date of filing of the suit till in actual realization", the petitioner filed the appeal for modification of the decree, which was partly allowed on 30.7.1999 and the trail Court decree was modified to the extent that it would deemed to be a composite decree passed under Order 34 of the CPC and the defendants were allowed six months time to make the payment, failing which the plaintiff was held entitled to recover the decretal amount by sale of mortgaged property and from the other properties of the defendants if the mortgaged properties were not found sufficient to realize the decretal amount.