Punjab Backward Classes Land Development and Finance Corporation vs Punjab National Bank and Others

M.L. Singhal, J.—Vide order dated 4.11.1986, Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Nawanshahar decreed the suit of the respondent plaintiff Bank for the recovery of Rs. 72,905/- with costs against the defendants jointly and severally. It was also ordered that the plaintiff Bank shall be entitled to future interest @ 12% per annum from the date of institution of the suit i.e., 26.9.1985 on the suit amount till realisation of the decretal amount.

Plaintiff (Punjab National Bank) had filed suit for the recovery of Rs. 72,905/- against Gurbax Singh, Punjab Backward Classes Land Development and Finance Corporation, Chandigarh through its Executive Director; Ajit Singh, Bhag Singh and Pritam Singh defendants. Plaintiff bank moved an application u/s 151, 152 and 153 C.P.C. for the amendment of the decree dated 4.11.1986. It was stated in the application that the plaintiff bank had sought the relief that the decretal amount be paid by the defendants jointly and severally and by the sale of the tractor bearing registration No. PBQ 4663. it was further stated in the application that the decree sheet did not disclose that there was any mention in it that the decretal amount shall be realised by the sale of the tractor and if the sale proceeds of the tractor failed to satisfy the decree, the recovery could be effected from the person of the defendants and the other property of the defendants. Defendants contested this application urging that this application was not maintainable. No amendment could be effected in the decree. If the plaintiff bank had any grievance, the remedy was to appeal against that decree.

Vide order date 12.10.1987, Additional Senior Subordinate Judge, Nawanshahar declined this application saying that the same was not maintainable. Aggrieved from this order, the plaintiff-bank has come up in revision to this Court.

Before disposing of this revision, it would be relevant to set out briefly the history of the advancement of loan to Gurbax Singh defendant-JD. Loan had been advanced to Gurbax Singh for the purchase of a tractor and under the terms and conditions of the hypothecated agreement which had been executed by Gurbax Singh in favour of the bank, tractor was duly hypothecated with the bank. Clause F of the hypothecated agreement entered into by him with the bank is reproduced as under:-

"That the defendant No. 1 agreed to charge, pledge and hypothecate the tractor in favour of the plaintiff bank as first charge as security for the due repayment of the indebtedness of the defendant No. 1 to the bank."

Clause 7 of the hypothecated agreement is reproduced as under:-

"That the bank shall initially recover the loan/defaulted instalments from the borrower from themselves created by the loan which already stand hypothecated with the bank for which may be so hypothecated in future or from any security provided by the borrower in favour of the bank."

Prayer of the plaintiff-bank in the plaint was as follows:-

"The suit of the plaintiff-bank be decreed by way of sale of the tractor No. PBQ 4663 which is hypothecated to the plaintiff-bank. If the sale proceeds of the tractor failed to satisfy the claim of the plaintiff-bank, a personal decree against the person and other properties of the defendant may also be passed."

In the grounds of revision, it has been submitted that the Additional Senior Sub Judge, Nawanshahar decreed the suit of the plaintiff and granted decree for the sum of Rs. 72,905/- against the petitioner and respondents No. 2 to 5 jointly and severally along with future interest which was not even claimed by the plaintiff-bank in the suit. In my opinion, this revision should succeed as if the decree is amended to accord with the prayer of the plaintiff-bank, that would not change the decree in substance. It will nonetheless remain a money decree passed against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 but with this stipulation that the loan amount shall be recovered by way of sale of the tractor No. PBQ 4663 and if the sale proceeds of the tractor are unable to satisfy the decretal amount, other properties of respondents No. 2 to 5 shall be liable to pay the decretal amount and if their property is unable to meet the claim of the plaintiff-bank, they shall be liable to personally to satisfy the claim of the plaintiff bank. In the first instance, decretal amount shall be recovered by the sale of the tractor No. PBQ 4663 and if the sale proceeds thereof do not satisfy the decree, the plaintiff bank shall be able to proceed against the other properties of respondents 2 to 5. If the other properties of respondents 2 to 5 are unable to satisfy the decree, the plaintiff-bank shall be able to execute the decree against the person of respondents 2 to 5. If still any part of the decree remains unsatisfied, that part of the decree could be recovered from the Punjab Backward Classes Land Development and Finance Corporation, Chandigarh because they were surety for this loan and introduced Gurbax Singh to the plaintiff-bank for granting him credit facilities for the purchase of a tractor. It was in pursuance of a scheme introduced for the uplift of the backward classes that Gurbax Singh was introduced to the plaintiff-bank for granting him loan. Decree be amended accordingly. Revision allowed.