Public Money Involved: Delhi High Court Restores Union Bank's Recovery Suit, Imposes ₹25k Cost For Lethargic Approach
The Delhi High Court was considering a Petition against an order of the Trial Court dismissing the suit for recovery filed by Union Bank.
Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has restored Union Bank's recovery suit holding that large public money is involved while calling out the lethargic approach employed leading to multiple adjournments and default dismissals.
The Court was considering a Petition against an order of the Trial Court dismissing the suit for recovery filed by Union Bank.
The Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed, "But the larger issue here is the involvement of public money. If the present petition is not allowed, the ultimate sufferer would be the exchequer. That being so, in my view, notwithstanding the lethargic and negligent (if not deliberate inaction to help the defendant) conduct of the petitioner bank, the suit should be revived subject to cost to be deposited by the petitioner bank. The said cost should be initially deposited by the petitioner bank and then recovered from the salary of the officer/manager who was in-charge of the litigation pertaining to the subject suit, if found erring."
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Rajiv Kumar.
When the suit was listed, none appeared for the Petitioner-Bank and observing that no application for substituted service of summons on the defendants was filed, the learned trial court dismissed the suit for default.
The Court found no infirmity in the Trial Court's order and observed that there is not even a whisper as to what the concerned officer of the petitioner bank, dealing with the subject suit was doing all the while.
"There is no explanation as to why the concerned law officer or the concerned manager of the petitioner bank neither appeared on any of the dates nor kept a track of the proceedings.....In view of above discussion, the petition is allowed and the subject suit is restored subject to the petitioner bank depositing cost of Rs.25,000/- with DHCLSC within two weeks", the Court observed.
The Petition was accordingly disposed of.
Cause Title: Union Bank of India v. M/s. Shabd Enterprises And Anr.