UCO BANK Vs. EASTERN SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 25.8.2000 learned counsel for the appellant and respondent no. 1 fairly agreed that this appeal can be disposed of without being admitted. However, as respondent no. 2 had not appeared, this Court directed for issuance of notice to respondent no. 2. After service of notice on respondent no. 2, with consent of parties, the appeal itself was heard in part on 9.10.2001. However, after the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel for appellant prayed for adjournment to see that the payment of the dues of the appellant Bank as per Annexure 1 is made. Accordingly, since then the matter was adjourned on several dates and lastly on 5.12.2001, this Court after noticing the fact that the matter has been coming up for quite some time and adjourned on several occasions on the request of the learned counsel for the respondents to enable the respondents to pay the entire remaining amount as agreed by the Bank, vide Annexure 1, with up -to -date interest on the remaining amount from that date but the action of the respondents has not been fair till then, however, on the request of the learned counsel for the respondents, adjourned the matter to 11th. December, 2001 with the assurance from the respondents received by the learned Counsel that the cheque for the remaining amount with up -to - date interest shall be produced on that date. On 11th December, 2001 the matter was passed over as the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that he has received instruction that the cheque shall positively be produced on 13th December, 2001, but today he expressed inability as the respondents have not turned up with the cheque.

(2.) THIS appeal filed on behalf of the Bank is directed against the order dated 21.7.1999 passed in Title Suit No. 183/ 1999/20/1999 by Subordinate Judge III, East Champaran, Motihari. on a petition filed on behalf of the plaintiff -respondent no.2 herein under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whereby and whereunder he has restrained the defendant -appellant from interfering in use, occupation and possession of the plaintiff over the suit premises named and styled as "Motihari Chini Udyog" fully described in Schedule I of the plaint. The defendant -appellant has also been restrained from creating any disturbance in running of the sugar factory till the disposal of the suit.

(3.) RESPONDENT no. 2 failed to make the payment in accordance with the said terms of settlement. On 8th July, 1997 the appellant Bank filed an application before the Tribunal, inter alia, contending that a total sum of Rs. 1,71,00,000/ - had been paid by respondent no. 2 in accordance with the terms of settlement and respondent no. 2 had failed and neglected to pay the balance instalment and, therefore, was required to pay the balance amount of Rs. 68,97,000/ - along with interest thereon as per the said compromise.