1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1939 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1939 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1939 OF 2008 The Jammu and Kashmir Bank ltd. ...Appellant (Org.Plaintiff) Versus M/s. Chandan Constructions Pune & Anr. Respondents (Orig. Defendants) Mr. Amol A. Deshpande, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. A.P.Vansarse, Advocate, for respondents. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J DATED: 17th October, 2008. DATED: 17th October, 2008. DATED: 17th October, 2008. P.C P.C P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties. 2. The appellant before this Court is the original plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants. The plaintiff is a Bank. According to the plaintiff, the 2 defendants on request were granted secured overdraft facility to the extent of Rs.25 lakhs on execution of necessary documents in the year 1996. The respondents had also deposited certain amounts with the Bank as term deposits. After adjustment of the term deposits, the plaintiff-Bank found that an amount of Rs.1,27,770/- was still due from the defendants. The plaintiff issued a notice to the defendants on 5.4.1999 claiming that amount with interest. However, the defendants failed to pay the amount. Therefore, the plaintiff filed special Civil Suit No.991 of 2001 claiming the principal amount and interest thereon at the rate of 20%. The defendants did not appear inspite of service of writ of summons and the matter, therefore, proceeded ex-parte. The trial Court found that the amount of rs.1,27,770/- was due from the defendants as per the loan amount. However, the suit came to be dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation. Therefore, the plaintiff filed this Appeal. 3. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff/appellant points out that the defendants had not appeared nor any issue of limitation was raised and without giving due opportunity to the plaintiff to prove that the suit was within limitation, the trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the suit was filed beyond limitation merely 3 because it was filed more than three years after the loan was advanced. 4. The learned Counsel for the defendants states that no written statement was filed. 5. Taking into consideration these circumstances, in the interest of justice, the Appeal is allowed. The impugned Judgment is hereby set aside. The Special Civil Suit No.991 of 2001 is hereby remanded back to the trial Court for hearing and disposal afresh, after giving an opportunity to the defendants to file written statement. The defendants shall file written statement before the trial Court within eight weeks from this date and after filing the written statement, the trial Court shall proceed as per law. In case the defendants fail to file written statement, the appellant shall be given sufficient opportunity to produce documentary and oral evidence to establish that the suit was within limitation. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 4 (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)