TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside the decree passed against the principal debtor by the learned Single Judge and we restored that decree. Therefore, so far as the principal debtor is concerned, there is a decree on admission against him under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. 3. As regards the decree against the guarantors, we had deferred the issue regarding the confirmation of the decree against them but had directed them to file a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Court. In the schedule, certain shares of a limited company and the value thereof has been stated. The deponent does not state that except the property shown in the schedule, he has no other property, The undertaking is, therefore, far from satisfactory. 4. Apart from that, we now find that the guarantors have instituted Suit No. 281 of 1995 in the High Court for a declaration that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the guarantors now needs to be settled. We had deferred the question by our order dated 28-11-1995 but now see no reason to further defer it. Since the decree has been confirmed against the principal debtor by virtue of the order of 28-11-1995, albeit on admission, we see no reason why the guarantors should not be made liable under the letters of guarantee, the terms whereof clearly stipulate tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
