Bank of India Vs. M/S. Madan Lal & Brothers
& Ors  INSC 607 (1 November 1995)
K. Ramaswamy, K. Kirpal B.N. (J)
1995 SCC Supl. (4) 213 JT 1995 (9) 129 1995 SCALE (6)353
O R D
stated that respondents 5-7 are the legal representatives of respondent No.4.
Therefore, the need to substitute them is obviated. They would represent the
estate of the deceased-4th respondent.
have heard the counsel on both sides. In all fairness, the counsel for the
respondents had stated that hypotheca, namely, the factory premises situated at
G.T. Road, Phagwara, ground floor marked as A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I
together with all structure existing thereon, with all the shade, Kothas,
boundary walls etc. etc. as mentioned in the Schedule to the plaint be assessed
at its market value as on date and may be put to execution. The amount realised
out of sale thereof would be credited to the account of decree in question. In
case the property is not sufficient, then it would be open to the respondents
to proceed for the recovery of the dues by proceeding agaist other orders or
proceedings accordance with law. We appreciate the fair stand taken by the
learned counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, the appellant is at liberty,
in the first instance, to proceed with the sale of the aforesaid property and realise
the decretal debt from the sale proceeds and to have the same satisfied with
the decree in execution. In case there is any shortfall, it would be open to
the appellants to proceed against any other assets or personally against any
other defendants in accordance with law. If sale proceeds are in excess, it is
needless to mention that the amount in excess of the decretal amount would be
paid over to the respondents.
appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.