BANWARI LAL Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order, under challenge, application of the petitioner, to defend the suit, was granted, subject to his furnishing bank guarantee/ fixed deposit of 50% of the principal amount, in dispute. Petitioner is aggrieved by the condition imposed, as referred to above. Before this Court, it has been stated that instead of bank guarantee, petitioner is ready to furnish surety of some immoveable property for the entire disputed amount. Offer made is very fair.

(2.) IN view of facts of this case, order dated 6.2.2006 is modified to the extent that instead of bank guarantee for 50% amount involved, petitioner shall furnish surety of some immoveable property to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for the whole principal amount, in dispute. At this stage, no notice is being issued to the opposite party, because if the respondent is summoned to contest this litigation, it may involve huge expenditure and unnecessary harassment and delay of the proceedings. This view finds support from the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in C.W.P. No.9563 of 2002, (Batala Machine Tools Workshop Co-op vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur), rendered on June 27, 2002, in which it was held as under:-