Court : DRAT Mumbai
1. Legality of the confirmation of the sale held by auction on 8.3.1997 is called in question in this appeal preferred by judgment-debtor (J.D.). The decree-holder Bank (D.H.B.) had obtained two decrees against the J.D. in Suit Nos. 542/85 and 14/86 from Jullandhar Court for Rs. 8,52,580.72 and Rs. 36,85,788.34 on 13.9.1985 and 27.9.1986 respectively. The decree in Suit No. 14/86 was directed to be executed by the sale of the mortgaged property.3. Both the decrees were put for execution. When the Bank could not execute the decrees in the normal course, the execution was sought by arrest and detention of the J.D. Jagdish Jain in civil prison.Accordingly the J.D. was arrested on or about 8.8.1994. In civil revision bearing No. 3160/94 preferred by J.D. in High Court he was directed to be released on bail. The execution proceedings which were pending in the Civil Court were then transferred to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur under the provisions of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Fina...
Tag this Judgment!Court : DRAT Mumbai
1. Both the appeals directed against the orders passed by the Recovery Officer auctioning the property and even confirming the sale are being disposed of by this common judgment.The decree-holder Bank had obtained money decree in Suit No. 552/86 from Jullandhar Court on 28.7.1987 for Rs. 21,17,551.64 along with future interest. The said decree was sought to be executed by the sale of mortgaged property. The execution proceedings came to be transferred to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur in view of the provisions of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.The Recovery Officer issued sale proclamation and the property which was already mortgaged with the Bank was put to auction on 6,3.1997. The highest bid for Rs. 43,47,000/- in favour of respondent No. 3 M/s.Jogasingh Sons was accepted.3. The objection petition for challenging the auction stood dismissed by the Recovery Officer resulting into the confirmation of the sale on 12.9.1997 and issuing of the sale c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : DRAT Mumbai
1. The important question of vesting or acquiring the jurisdiction directly by the Recovery Officer in a transfer execution proceedings is involved in this appeal preferred by the judgment-debtors.2. The facts leading to the transfer of execution proceedings are as below : Consent decree in Suit No. 170/84 was obtained by the decree-holder Bank on 20.10.1986 for Rs. 10,13,745.06. The decree also directed the payment of future interest. The copy of the decree is however not produced on record. The Bank sought to execute this decree in execution proceedings bearing No. 165/1988 in Jullandhar Court who had passed the decree by attachment and sale of the properties belonging to the judgment-debtors and also by civil imprisonment. The Exerting Court had even issued the warrant of arrest on or about 17.3.1990. There were in all eight (8) decrees and all of them were sought to be executed by the arrest of the judgment-debtors. The decrees in 7 (seven) were fully satisfied and as such the que...
Tag this Judgment!Court : DRAT Mumbai
1. The short and the only point about acceptance of 40 Hundies and the liability thereunder is involved in this appeal preferred by the original defendants against whom the decree for Rs. 13,85,635.15 with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum is passed on the basis of the said 40 Hundies.M/s. Bhilwara Wooltex who is not the party to the suit had drawn 40 Hundies on different dates for different amounts on the documents during the period from 24.12.1985 to 11.9.1986. The Hundies were in favour of the applicant Bank. The amounts under the Hundies were payable after the particular period. The applicant Bank on the receipt of the Hundies forwarded them through Punjab National Bank for payment.The defendants in whose name the Hundies were drawn dishonoured them.3. It was alleged by the applicant Bank that the Hundies were accepted by the defendants on their premises. In spite of acceptance the defendants have refused to pay Hundies amounts which were calculated at Rs. 11,98,134.20. ...
Tag this Judgment!