State Bank Of Hyderabad vs Rolly Polly (P) Ltd.
1991 Latest Caselaw 24 Del

JUDGMENT

Mahinder Narain

(1) This matter has been placed before me for passing order regarding deemed admission of documents in view of the fact that documents filed by the plaintiff have not been admitted/ denied by the defendants.

(2) Mr. Suresh Arora, Advocate appearing for counsel for the defendants says that counsel has already sent a registered notice to the defendants intimating that they will withdraw from the case which notice has been served. However, no application for determination of the authority of the counsel has been filed as yet. It is said that it is being filed. Let such an application be filed within a week.

(3) As regards deemed admission under Order 12 Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. In my view there should not be any "deemed admission" of documents in this case. This case has been filed by a bank against the defendants for recovery of money on the basis of accounts. Entries in the books of accounts have to be proved. As and when entries in the accounts are proved, the person concerned is charged with liability u/S. 34 of the Evidence Act. That section mandates that each of the entries in the accounts has to be proved.

(4) That entries in the account, have to be proved has been settled by the Supreme Court in Chandra Dhar Swami vs. Gauhati Bank . On proof of entries as postulated by that judgment liability to pay shall arise.

(5) If deemed admission is ordered it would mean that the judgment of the Supreme Court in 1967 Sc 1058 & Section 34 of the Evidence Act shall be negated. As liability will arise without proof of entries in the books of account. This would not be either right or legal. I, therefore, decline to pass orders under Order 12 Rule 3-A Civil Procedure Code .