DURJAN LAL Vs. STATE BANK OF BIKANER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned District Judge, Jodhpur dated 1/12/1993 by which he has granted leave to defend to the defendant-petitioner on his furnishing bank guarantee for Rs. 55,000.00.

(2.) The plaintiff-Bank filed a suit for the recovery of Rs.54,208.00 under Order 37, Rule 2, C.P.C. The defendant put his appearance and filed an application for leave to defend under Order 37, Rule 3(5), C.P.C. At the time of its hearing, the learned council for the plaintiff stated that if the defendant was ready to furnish bank guarantee leave to defend may be granted, thereon the defendant agreed and accordingly the impugned order was passed.

(3.) tended by the learned counsel for defendant-petitioner that the, impugned order is against the spirit of the provisions of Order 37, C.P.C., the trial Court did not pass detailed order, neither the plaintiffs counsel stated that leave to defend may be granted if the defendant furnishes a bank guarantee nor the defendant's counsel agreed to it and under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is necessary to contest the suit otherwise the defendant would suffer an irreparable injury as admittedly loan was not taken by him from the plaintiff Bank.