ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. S D ENTERPRISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN spite of that both the contending parties have presented their respective pleadings, those parties have adduced the evidences in the form of documentary evidences to corroborate what they have tended to contend with force against each other and this Tribunal has also been about to frame the issues both of fact as well as of law in the present proceeding and especially after receiving one petition for the temporary injunction with respect to the properties of the defendants, this Tribunal has been materially of the view that the specific defences, which have not only been taken out in the written statement presented by the impleaded three defendants jointly to traverse the claimed entitlement of the applicant Bank but have also been aimed at establishing the claim of the contesting defendants against the Bank have, all on a sudden, been bidden a farewell by an application jointly preferred by the defendants on July 4, 2003. The above view has been factually arrived at by this body, especially when it is seriously scrutinising the application of the Bank for the temporary injunction to be granted to such Bank in respect of the different properties of the defendants that have been earlier secured to the above Bank.

(2.) The said application of the defendants should be known as an application made aftermath the written statement so presented and the evidences led by both the contending parties to establish beyond doubt their respective contention. The said application should also be given the necessary name for its own distinction; that is it has been meant for a judicial admission expressly and constructively made by the answering three defendants in clear and unambiguous words as to their joint legal liability towards a sum of Rs. 50,06,949.70 P. for the steady recovery of which the applicant Bank has preferred one application on October 9, 1998 against the above defendants. Before dealing with the nature and scope of judicial admission as well as the duties to be performed by this judicial body in the context of such typical admission on record, it is being worthwhile to reproduce what have been categorically contained in the application preferred on Friday, July 4, 2003 before this Tribunal. The said application has been actually made, after being duly verified by Shri Bhaskar Mukherjee, the defendant No. 2, who is the proprietor of the defendant No. 1. The entire application is being consequently set-forth below:

(3.) AT the outset of the present discussion, it has been specifically pointed out that the said application has given rise to a stage to be known as the stage of admission which is sufficient to pave the way for the application of the provisions as contained in Sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of Order XII of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. V of 1908) as well as Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872).