1983 (2) TMI 214

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d Vijay Jhanji for the Petitioner. A.C. Jain for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Rajendra Nath Mittal, J.-Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner filed Suit No. 960 of 1979 (State Bank of India v. Depro Foods Ltd.) for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 70,26,642.42 against the respondent-company in the High Court of Delhi on July 9, 1979. After the institution of the suit, this court ordered t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....resaid orders, the suit was transferred to this court and was numbered as C.P. No. 69 of 1982. One of the claims in that case (C.P. No. 69 of 1982) is in respect of the payment of seven instalments which had fallen due as guarantee amount, by the petitioner to M/s. Techno Export of Sofia (Bulgaria) from whom necessary plant and equipment were imported by respondent No. 1 for setting up a dehydr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h the leave of the court. The leave can be granted after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case, as already stated, the claim of the petitioner is not only against respondent No. 1 but also against the directors who became guarantors for repayment of loan. Two of the respondents even mortgaged their properties with the petitioner. It is well settled....