9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of six months. Consequently after service of aforesaid notice by plaintiff on contesting defendants, the plaintiff no longer remained surety for defendant No. 4 since after June 26, 1992 on expiry of the notice period of six months. The disputed liability admittedly relates to the period thereafter. Consequently the plaintiff is not liable to satisfy the said liability of defendant No. 4. When the plaintiff is neither dealer nor surety nor assessee, the plaintiff is not amenable to the jurisdiction of defendants Nos. 1 to 3 under the Act. Consequently, entire action of defendants Nos. 1 to 3 is illegal and against statutory provisions and therefore, jurisdiction of civil court to challenge the said action is not barred, notwithstanding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the notice period of six months lapsed on June 26, 1992 and thereafter the plaintiff is not liable as surety of defendant No. 4 to pay the amount due from defendant No. 4. Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 contested the suit whereas defendant No. 4 was proceeded against ex parte. Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 denied having received alleged notice dated December 26, 1991 from the plaintiff withdrawing its surety bond. It was pleaded that plaintiff as surety is liable to pay the disputed amount due from the assessee. Various notices were also issued to the plaintiff but the plaintiff failed to pay the suit amount. Various other pleas were also raised. Both the courts below have decreed the plaintiff's suit. Feeling aggrieved, defendants have f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fendants of the relevant period has also been withheld, again giving rise to adverse presumption against the contesting defendants. In the aforesaid circumstances, concurrent finding recorded by the courts below regarding service of the aforesaid notice by plaintiff on contesting defendants, is fully justified by the evidence on record. The said finding is not shown to be perverse or illegal or based on misreading or misappreciation of the evidence on record. Consequently there is no ground to interfere with the said finding. It is undisputed that as per terms and conditions of the surety bond furnished by the plaintiff, the plaintiff had right to withdraw its surety bond by serving notice of six months. Consequently after service of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
