UCO BANK Vs. YASH PAUL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER made in this application is to hear the Civil Revision at an early date.

(2.) SINCE respondents could not be served through ordinary process, they were served by way of substituted service. Despite service, none has come forward to represent them. Considering that the suit for recovery of amount filed by the petitioner Bank was stayed at the motion hearing, the Civil Revision is taken on board. Counsel heard.

(3.) PETITIONER bank had granted cash assistance to respondent No. 1 for the purchase of a bus to the tune of Rs. 2,45,000/ -. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 2 stood guarantor for the loan. It is also the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 1 failed to deposit the instalment in time and also infringed the terms and conditions of the loan. Petitioner alleged that the respondent had in violation of the hypothecation, sold the bus to respondent No. 3 without the consent of the petitioner. Petitioner thus filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,90,253/ -. The suit was filed by P. K. Mehra, the then Manager. The bank led its evidence and examined K. K. Gulati, PW-1 and R. K. Malik, PW-2 to prove the terms and conditions of the loan. Evidence of the bank was closed on 18. 1. 1993 by order of the Court. When the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments, it was realised that inadvertently the statement of account showing debit balance of Rs. 2,90,253 of the loanee on the date of filing of the suit, the General Power of Attorney of the bank in favour of P. K. Mehra and the sanction order, had not been got exhibited. It is the case of the petitioner that these documents had been filed along with the plaint but the counsel failed to get the same exhibited. In order to prove these documents, the petitioner moved an application for permission to prove the documents by way of additional evidence but the same has been rejected by the trial Court vide order dated 5. 9. 1994. Hence, this civil revision.