TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt no. 1 for the purposes of his business and on that date he had executed a demand promissory note, hypothecation of goods agreement and other documents. Respondent no.2 and one Sh. Suresh Kumar, husband of respondent no.3 had stood as guarantors for the repayment of the loan. The respondents were stated to have agreed to pay interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum with quarterly rests. When default in payment of the money was committed the aforesaid suit was filed for the recovery of the principal amount and the interest thereon. The sum total came to ₹ 1,40,553.91. In the written statement filed by respondent no.1 the plea which was taken was that he had never taken loan as alleged by the appellant bank and respondent no. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Whether the defendants no.2 and 3 stood as guarantors for the repayment of the loan and if so, what is the extent of their liability? OPP 4. What is the balance amount? OPP 5. Whether the plaintiff varied the terms of loan and if so, its effect qua the liabilities of defendants no.2 and 3, Onus on parties. 6. Whether the statement of account produced by the plaintiff is admissible in evidence? OPP 7. Whether the defendants agreed to pay interest if so, at what rate and to what amount? OPP 8. Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action? OPP 9. Relief. The trial judge by his judgment dated 14th November, 1987 decided issue nos. 1,2 and 7 against the appellant. Issues 3,4,5 and 6 were held in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Judge upheld the decision of the trial court with regard to issue no.1. It was held that it has not been proved that Sh. L.K. Rohatgi had held any valid authority to file the suit on behalf of the appellant bank. Against the aforesaid decision of the Additional District Judge the appellant filed a regular second appeal. By order dated 30th August, 1993 a single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the said appeal in limine by observing that there was no ground for interference with the concurrent findings of facts recorded by two courts below. Hence this appeal by special leave. In this appeal, therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the plaint was duly signed and verified by a competent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erify the pleadings on behalf of the corporation. In addition thereto and de hors Order 29 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as a company is a juristic entity, it can duly authorise any person to sign the plaint or the written statement on its behalf and this would be regarded as sufficient compliance with the provisions of Order 6 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A person may be expressly authorised to sign the pleadings on behalf of the company, for example by the Board of Directors passing a resolution to that effect or by a power of attorney being executed in favour of any individual. In absence thereof and in cases where pleadings have been signed by one of it s officers a Corporation can ratify the said action of it s offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant was justified it will be a travesty of justice if the appellant is to be non suited for a technical reason which does not go to the root of the matter. The suit did not suffer from any jurisdictional infirmity and the only defect which was alleged on behalf of the respondents was one which was curable. The court had to be satisfied that Sh. L.K. Rohatgi could sign the plaint on behalf of the appellant. The suit had been filed in the name of the appellant company; full amount of court fee had been paid by the appellant bank; documentary as well as oral evidence had been led on behalf of the appellant and the trial of the suit before the Sub Judge, Ambala, had continued for about two years. It is difficult, in these circumstances, eve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
