- (1.) THE above twenty-one first miscellaneous appeals with the connected applications were heard analogously as the points involved in all these appeals were more or less similar. The facts involved in these appeals are also to some extent similar with slight variations in some of the cases. Accordingly, we decided to hear out all these appeals together and have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
(2.) ALL these appeals are preferred by the financier and are directed against similar orders passed by the learned Trial Judge thereby extending the ad interim order of injunction earlier granted in the proceeding by restraining the financier from taking possession of the vehicle which is the subject-matter of the dispute till the disposal of the application for temporary injunction in spite of the fact that the financier-appellant entered appearance and filed applications under Sections 5 and 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act pointing out existence of the arbitration agreement between the parties and in some of the matters, the appellant filed written objection to the application for injunction opposing extension by pointing out suppression of material facts in the application.
(3.) IT appears from record that twenty-one different suits were filed by the different respondents in these appeals thereby praying for declaration that they interfere with the possession of those plaintiffs in the vehicles. A further declaration was prayed for declaring that the plaintiffs were entitled to get the papers and documents upon which their signatures were taken by the financier on blank papers at the time of settlement of loan. A further decree for permanent injunction was prayed for restraining the financier, their men, agents and associates from seizing or taking possession of the concerned vehicle or disturbing peaceful possession of the plaintiffs in respect of such vehicle. The sum and substance of the allegations made in the plaints of those suits was that the plaintiffs for the purpose of purchasing a vehicle on loan approached the defendant and as a condition of granting such loan, the plaintiffs we Sukumar Nandi and asked to sign on various blank papers and blank cheques were taken from them with the assurance of giving the terms of the agreement to the plaintiffs in future, but till the filing of the suit, the financier did not supply the papers containing the terms and conditions of grant of such loan. According to the plaintiffs, they are unaware of the terms of grant of such loan and by taking advantage of the signatures taken on the papers, some oppressive terms have been introduced and for alleged violation of such terms, the financier was trying to seize the vehicles purchased by them with the amount taken as a loan.;