Dismissed

Syndicate Bank v. Devindra Singh etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Jul 2013RSA/2508/1985

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the appeal filed by Syndicate Bank for recovery of a meagre sum of Rs.2,000/-, as lower courts recorded concurrent findings that legal proceedings were not instituted due to lack of sanction, rendering the suit legally unsustainable. The appeal was traitless and devoid of substantial questions of law.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed with costs of Rs.2,000/- to be deposited with the Haryana Legal Services Authority within one month.

Syndicate Bank Vs Devindra Singh etc. — Execution and Attachment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

¶2

AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

RSA No.2508 of 1985 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.7.2013

Syndicate Bank

-----appellant(s)

Vs.

Devindra Singh & anr.

¶8

-----Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

¶10

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

¶11

¶12

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Present: None. ---

¶15

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.

¶16

Suit for recovery was filed by the plaintiff-appellant bank pleading that defendant-respondent No.1 sought a loan of Rs.2,000/-. Respondent No.2 stood as surety of the said borrower and an agreement was executed on 11.3.1976 in favour of the appellant-bank and accordingly, a loan of Rs.2,000/- was granted. Since defendant No.1 failed to pay the aforesaid amount, suit for recovery was filed.

¶17

Upon notice, defendant No.2 was proceeded against ex-parte . Defendant No.1 contested the suit, denying the taking of loan by him.

¶18

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶19

RSA No.2508 of 1985

¶20

¶21

The trial Court after considering the evidence on record, dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 6.5.1982, observing that the attorney of the bank was not authorized to sign and verify the plaints, thus, there is no sanction to initiate legal proceedings against the respondent.

¶22

Appeal filed by the appellant-bank against the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 6.5.1982 was dismissed by the first appellate Court on 20.4.1985.

¶23

Being aggrieved from the aforesaid judgments and decrees of the Courts below, the instant appeal has been filed, which was admitted on 17.9.1985 and is pending before this Court.

¶24

No one is present on behalf of the appellant-bank. Neither any substantial question of law arising out of this appeal have been framed and placed on record of this appeal.

¶25

Not only this, this appeal has been filed for recovery of a meagre sum of Rs.2,000/-. Both the Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding that the proceedings were not instituted legally, as there was no sanction.

¶26

In view thereof, this appeal is dismissed with costs, which are assessed at Rs.2,000/-.

¶27

Let the costs be deposited with the Haryana Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh within a month from today.

¶28

July 24, 2013

¶29

[RAKESH KUMAR GARG]

¶30

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

RSA No.2508 of 1985

ak JUDGE

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Syndicate Bank v. Devindra Singh etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syndicate Bank v. Devindra Singh etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Inderjit Kaur and Others Vs Varinder Kumar and Others

M/S Faquir Chand Karwa and Sons and Anr. Vs Vinod Kapoor and Ors.

Kulwant Kaur Vs Gian Singh Mann and Ors.

Jai Pal Vs Sita Rani

Surjit Kaur Vs Lovely Ice Creams

Amar Nath Vs Maluka etc.