RAM BHAGAT Vs. HARYANA FINANCIAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal. Application is accompanied by an affidavit. In view of reasoning given in the application, it is allowed subject to just exceptions and delay in refiling the appeal is condoned.

(2.) Appellant plaintiff filed a suit, claiming decree of declaration to the effect that he is not legally bound to make payment of the loan amount, which is due from respondents defendants No. 3 to 5. He further challenged the letters of recovery issued to him by the Financial Corporation. It was his contention that the Financial Corporation is supposed to recover the said amount, in the first instance, from the principal debtors and not from him. When, despite giving him many opportunities, over a span of about two years, he failed to lead any evidence, his evidence was closed and consequently suit was also dismissed. Appellant failed in appeal. This Court feels that no case is made out for interference in the present case. Issues were framed on May 9, 2000. Thereafter many dates were given and ultimately, when appellant failed to bring any evidence on record, his evidence was closed on April 1, 2002. It is an admitted fact that the appellant stood as a guarantor at the time of raising loan by the private respondents.

(3.) Under these circumstances, his liability to repay the loan amount was coexistent with the principal debtors. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed.