RENU GUPTA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision by the plaintiffs is directed against Order dated 10.08.2007 passed by learned 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu, whereby their application for passing a decree in their favour in terms of Order 12 Rule 6 CPC has been dismissed.

(2.) Heard. Considered. I have perused the record.

(3.) Petitioners (plaintiffs) have filed a suit for mandatory injunction directing respondents (defendants) to allow the petitioners to operate locker No. 260 hired by them at Bakshi Nagar branch of respondent-Bank. It is alleged in the suit, briefly, that having hired aforesaid locker in the 1995, both the petitioners had been operating the same jointly as well as individually up to July, 1997. They have kept their important documents in this locker. Officials of the respondent-Bank, however, did not allow petitioner No. 2 to operate the locker when he visited the Bank on 22.7.1997. He approached respondent No. 2, who too refused to allow him and gave him refusal letter stating that Vigilance Organization has stopped operation of the said locker. He also provided copy of letter No. SSP/97- 494/VOJ dated 20.11.1997 containing instructions not to permit the petitioners to operate the said locker. The petitioners have also contended in their suit that refusal of the respondent- Bank to allow them operation of locker at the behest of Vigilance Organization, is illegal and wrongful as they are not involving in any criminal case. The petitioners have further contended that Vigilance Organization, Jammu has registered FIR No. 26/97 of PS/VOJ against Shri V. K. Gupta and after completing investigation presented challan against him and his wife Ms. Suman Mala in the Court of law. The detail of assets possessed by the said accused given in the said challan and documents attached thereto did not include above said locker of the petitioners and the locker has nothing to do with said Mr. V. K. Gupta or his wife. However, even after presentation of the challan, Vigilance Organization has not taken steps to withdraw the wrongful and illegal instructions issued to the respondent-Bank.