1988 (12) TMI 341

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r instructed by M/s. Pandya Gandhi and Co. For Respondents/Defendant: D.S. Parikh for defendant No. 1, J.V. Thakker for defendant No. 2 ORDER Hosbet Suresh, J. 1. In this Summons for Judgment taken out by the plaintiffs, the State Industrial and Investment Corporation of Maharashtra Limited as against the defendants who are guarantors of a certain Company, the defendants have sought le....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to their detriment and, therefore, that cannot be said to have been covered by the provisions of section 133 of the Indian Contract Act. Mr. Parikh has pointed out that in any event the debt is fully secured by a mortgage of the properties by the Company which is required to keep a minimum margin of 30% on the value of the fixed assets offered as security thereunder to the plaintiffs. 2. I have....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be treated as principal debtors and if that is so, the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree as against the defendants irrespective of the defences taken up by them. Mr. Tulzapurkar further submitted that if the Court relies on the security furnished by the Company as security or any term for the purpose of granting any conditional leave to defend the suit, it virtually amounts to the same as sayin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er terms as are just and proper, for the purpose of enabling a party to defend the suit in such cases. By and large the order for deposit works out as a deterrent as against the defendants who intend to defend the suit without much of a defence. But I think ultimately if a party deposits the amount in Court, it turns out to be nothing but a security for payment of the decretal amount as and when t....