JOGINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Joginder Singh, the petitioner had raised a loan of Rs. 70,000/- for purchase of a tractor from the respondent No. 5, the Phagwara Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Limited (for short 'the bank') during December, 1984. Similarly, Darshan Singh petitioner No. 2 had raised a loan of Rs. 12,000/- from the said bank for purchase of a trolley in January, 1985, Since the loan was not repaid, the bank initiated recovery proceedings in June, 1986. As soon as the recovery proceedings were started, the petitioner No. 1 filed a civil suit before the Sub Judge 1st Class, Phagwara in which it was claimed that the loan could not be recovered from him as neither the loan amount was given to him nor any tractor was ever delivered to him. This civil suit was dismissed on 27.10.1988. he thereafter, filed an appeal before the District Judge and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 9.8.1991. Against the order of the District Judge, he filed a regular second appeal in this Court which was dismissed on 20.1.1992 by the following order:-

(2.) On remand the Deputy Registrar once again went into the matter and found that the tractor in question had been manufactured in 1984 whereas it had been exported to Uganda on 9.4.1986. he also found that the cheque of the amount of loan had been given to M/s International Tractors under written instructions of the petitioners against a bill for sale of this very tractor and as such the loan stood proved. According to the Deputy Registrar, if the petitioners had any grievance against non-delivery of the tractor, they could only proceed against M/s International Tractors and not against the bank, consequently, the Deputy Registrar once again rejected the petition of the petitioners vide order dated 24.10.1994.

(3.) The petitioners filed an appeal against the order of the Deputy Registrar before the Registrar under Section 68 of the Act which was allowed by him vide order dated 17.7.1996 accepting the argument of the petitioners that the tractor exported to Uganda could not have been delivered to the petitioner No. 1 and that the loan to petitioner No. 2 advanced for purchase of trolley could not be justified against the bill showing sale of "implements". He, therefore, ordered that the amounts of Rs. 26,880/- and Rs. 2,032/-paid by the petitioners to M/s International Tractors as down payments against purchase of tractor/trolley be refunded to them. Not satisfied with the order of the Registrar, the bank filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner, who vide his order dated 4.7.1997 agreed with the detailed reasoning given by the Deputy Registrar and allowed the revision petition setting aside the appellate order dated 17.7.1996 passed by the Registrar. It is against this order of the Financial Commissioner that the present writ petition has been filed.