Canara Bank v. M/S R.K. Enterprises And Others

YOGESH SHARMA 2018.12.17 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2524-2017 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH RSA-2524-2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.12.2018 Canara Bank ... Appellant

Versus

M/s R.K. Enterprises and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Sushil Grover, Advocate for the appellants.

**** AMIT RAWAL, J.

CM-6196-C-2017 For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 192 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.

CM stands disposed of.

RSA-2524-2017 The short point involved in the present regular second appeal is whether the judgment and decree of the trial Court modified viz-a-viz grantor by holding the suit of the Bank being barred by law of limitation in the absence of any acknowledgment of debt or extension, is maintainable or not. The suit against the borrower and grantor was filed in the month of September 2009.

Learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff has raised the argument that once the borrower had signed the acknowledgement, the

YOGESH SHARMA 2018.12.17 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2524-2017 (O&M) liability would be of the grantor.

I am afraid the aforementioned argument is not sustainable as no explanation has come forth why the acknowledgment of grantor was not obtained, in case the period of limitation was going to expire. No ground for interference is made out and the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court cannot be said to be suffered from any illegality and perversity. The present regular second appeal is dismissed. 14.12.2018 Yogesh Sharma ( AMIT RAWAL ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No