C. R. No. 1017 of 1981. Case: Eastern Railway Employees Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Saroj Nath Dhar Gupta and Ors.. High Court of Calcutta (India)
| Case Number | C. R. No. 1017 of 1981 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: R.N. Das and R.N. Sil, Advs. and For Respondents: Sailendra Nath Roy, Advs. |
| Judges | Chittatosh Mookerjee, J. |
| Issue | Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Rule 10 |
| Citation | 86 CWN 156 |
| Judgement Date | October 05, 1982 |
| Court | High Court of Calcutta (India) |
Judgment:
Chittatosh Mookerjee, J.
-
The plaintiff opposite party, Saroj Nath Dhar Gupta had instituted Title Suit No. 417 of 1975 in the First Munsifs Court, Asansol against the petitioner Eastern Railway Employees Cooperative Bank Ltd and the Divisional Superintendent, Eastern Railway, Asansol interafia, for a decree declaring that the defendants were not entitled to realise any amount from the plaintiff in respect of the loan taken by the principal borrower, Srikrishna Chatterjee in January, 1968 and that it was the liability and responsibility of the defendants to realise the said dues from the said principal borrower and that the realisation was time barred. The said plaintiff has also prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from realising any amount from the plaintiff's salary towards repayment of the said loan taken by the principal borrower from the defendant No. 2.the Co-operative Bank. The defendant No. 2, the Eastern Railway Employees Co-operative Bank Ltd. in its written statement filed in the trial court, interalia, claimed that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the Suit because of clause (d) of sub-section (2) of section 132 read with clause (q) of section (2) and sub-clauses (6) and (e) of sub section (1) of Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1973. It is not necessary to set out the other averments in the said written statement.
-
The learned Munsif, 1st Court, Asansol by the order complained of has over-ruled the objection of the defendant No. 2 about the maintainability of the aforesaid suit and has held that he has jurisdiction to try the said suit. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has obtained the present Civil Rule.
-
The plaintiff opposite party in paragraph (1) of his plaint has averred that while he was engaged as Head Train Examiner, Eastern Railway, Gomoh, he stood as a Surety for one Srikrishna Chatterjee, Assistant security Officer, Eastern Railway, Dhanbad for a loan taken by the latter in January, 1968. The plaintiff's case in the aforesaid suit is that the amount of the said lean outstanding has become time barred and the said sum could not be realised from making deductions of the plaintiff's salary.
-
In my view, the learned Munsif has committed an error apparent on the face of the record in holding that the instant suit is barred by section 132(2) clause (d) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1963 and that he has jurisdiction to try the suit.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial