Drat Madras Court January 2004 Judgments
State Bank of India Vs. D.V.S. Raju and ors.
Court: DRAT Madras
Decided on: Jan-28-2004
Reported in: III(2004)BC117
1. The Original Application (OA) was decreed by the PO, DRT, Hyderabad, as against the other defendants except defendant No. 3 and the OA was dismissed as against D3 by Order dated 18.6.2002. Aggrieved against this dismissal Order as against D3 the appellant Bank has come forward with this appeal.2. Counsel for the appellant Bank submits that D3 is also liable for Suit claim since he executed the guarantee and the decree has to be passed as against D3 also. Counsel for the 1st respondent/3rd defendant submits that D3 resigned from his Directorship in the year 1981 and he was no longer the Director and he had no more claim over the 1st defendant Company and all the loan transactions were done by the next set of Directors and not by this respondent and the 1st respondent is not liable and the Order passed by the PO, DRT, is not to be interfered with.3. Counsel for the appellant Bank very much relied upon the guarantees executed by the 1 st respondent, other Directors and the 1st defenda...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Plastic Industries Vs. State Bank of India
Court: DRAT Madras
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: II(2004)BC255
1. The PO, DRT, Bangalore, allowed the Original Application (OA) mainly on the evidence of the defendant and no evidence was let in on the side of the applicant Bank and relying upon the defendant's evidence the OA has been allowed. Aggrieved against that order the appellant has come forward with this appeal.2. Counsel for the appellant submits that the Bank has not adduced any evidence to prove the claim of the Bank and only on some admissions made by the defendant the PO, DRT, has allowed the OA and that is not proper. On a perusal of the order it is seen that the Bank has let in any evidence and there is only the evidence of the defendant available who has filed the affidavit in accordance with the reply statement. The PO, DRT, has mainly relied upon some of the admissions made by the defendant stating that the defendant has taken the loan from the Bank and has signed all the documents produced by the Bank and Exs. A1 to A10 are the documents signed by him and he admits all the doc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›