SUDHIR AGARWAL, J. - (1.) Heard Ms. Ankita Jain, learned counsel for appellant. None appeared on behalf of respondents, hence we proceed to decide this appeal ex-parte.
(2.) This is an appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") arising from judgment dated 04.03.2011 passed by Ms. Rakhi Dixit, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, Aligarh dismissing appellant's Original Suit (hereinafter referred to as "OS") No. 523 of 2002 on the ground that it is not maintainable and barred by Section 446 of Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1956").
(3.) Facts in brief, giving rise to present appeal, are that plaintiff-appellant, Khalid Mukhtar (hereinafter referred to as "appellant") instituted above suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aligarh seeking a declaration that defendant-1, i.e. M/s Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation of U.P. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "PICUP"), has lost security of Company and their mortgage in the matter of enforcement of guarantee due to bar of limitation, therefore, PICUP is not entitled to enforce guarantee in August, 1983 against appellant regarding alleged debt of defendant-2 i.e. M/s Buckeye Batteries Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Principal Debtor"). Appellant has also prayed for issue of a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining PICUP from enforcement of guarantee in regard to Principal Debtor, against appellant.;