{"id":6563,"date":"2008-11-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008"},"modified":"2018-09-06T09:14:43","modified_gmt":"2018-09-06T03:44:43","slug":"ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog<\/div>\n
*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n+                        RFA No.46\/2002\n\n                             Reserved on : 23rd September, 2008\n                         % Date of decision: 28th November, 2008\n\nASHISH POLYFIBRES (BIHAR) LTD.         ...Appellant\n                   Through: Mr. K.K. Bhuchar, Adv.\n\n                versus\n\nSTATE BANK OF INDIA                        ...Respondent\n                         Through:    Mr. Rajiv Kapur, Adv.\n\nCORAM :-\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA\n\n1.       Whether Reporters of Local papers may\n         be allowed to see the Judgment?\n\n2.       To be referred to the Reporter or not?      Yes.\n\n3.       Whether the judgment should be\n         reported in the Digest?                     Yes.\n\nJ.R. MIDHA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
1.       Appellant   No.1   is   a   Limited   Company   of     which<\/p>\n
Appellants No.2 and 3 and Respondent No.2 are the Directors.<\/p>\n
Appellant No.1 had Current Account No.CA-5527 with State<\/p>\n
Bank of India, Nehru Place Branch. In the year 1990 entries<\/p>\n
were being recorded by the bank pertaining to the account of<\/p>\n
its customers by means of an escota machine.<\/p>\n
2.       On 17th May, 1990, the escota machine, due to<\/p>\n
technical defect, made a wrong credit in the sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,86,421.57 in the account of Appellant No.1. Respondent<\/p>\n
No.1\/Bank detected the aforesaid mistake on 2nd April, 1991<\/p>\n
whereupon letters were written by the Bank to the appellants<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                                 Page 1 of 9<\/span>
\n who acknowledged the liability and refunded Rs.20,000\/- by<\/p>\n
cheque and promised to pay the balance in installments, but<\/p>\n
failed to honour the commitment and, therefore, Respondent<\/p>\n
No.1 filed a suit for recovery before the learned District Judge.<\/p>\n
3.       The appellants appeared before the learned Trial Court<\/p>\n
and filed a joint written statement in which they denied all the<\/p>\n
aforesaid averments made in the plaint, except the refund of<\/p>\n
Rs.20,000\/-. Respondent No.2, who was defendant No.4, did<\/p>\n
not appear before the learned Trial Court and was proceeded<\/p>\n
ex parte.\n<\/p>\n
4.       At the trial, Respondent No.1 produced one witness,<\/p>\n
PW-1, who proved the overdraft of Rs.1,86,721.57 created in<\/p>\n
the account of Appellant No.1 due to wrong credit and defect<\/p>\n
in the escota machine. The witness proved the Statement of<\/p>\n
Account-Ex.PW-1\/1, letters Ex.PW-1\/C, PW-1\/D and legal<\/p>\n
notices Ex.PW-1\/J and PW-1\/S by the Bank to the appellants<\/p>\n
and letters Ex.PW-1\/E, PW-1\/G, PW-1\/H, PW-1\/I, PW-1\/Q<\/p>\n
by the appellants to the Bank.\n<\/p>\n
5.       The appellants did not lead any evidence in defence.<\/p>\n
6.       The appellants acknowledged the liability in their<\/p>\n
letters written to the Bank. The relevant extract of the letters<\/p>\n
by the appellants to the Bank are as under:-<\/p>\n
(i)      Ex.PW-1\/I – letter dated 3rd April, 1991 of Appellant<\/p>\n
         No.1 (signed by Appellant No.3 as its Managing<\/p>\n
         Director) to the Bank in which it was stated as under:-<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                             Page 2 of 9<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
                 “We wish to inform you that our Accountant
\n                Shri Manoj received a telephone call from
\n                your Branch intimating that the Bank had
\n                through inadvertence credited a sum of
\n                Rs.1,86,421.57 in our aforesaid account.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                We have informed you that our books are
\n                with our statutory auditors at Calcutta. We
\n                have taken up the matter to verify this
\n                particular entry. We assure you that we will
\n                arrange to put adequate funds, for you to
\n                debit the principal amount to our account,
\n                without any interest charges, in case the
\n                above is found correct.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                It may please be noted that it will take 5 to 6
\n                weeks to carry out the above assurance. We
\n                will request you to please wait for the said
\n                period.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                We once again assure you that the funds will
\n                be put at your disposal in the above time in
\n                case the entry is found to be correct.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
(ii)     Ex.PW-1\/H – letter dated 27th May, 1991 of Appellant<\/p>\n
         No.1 (signed by Appellant No.2 as Joint Managing<\/p>\n
         Director to the Bank) in which it was stated as under:-<\/p>\n
                “Please refer to your letter No.C&I\/91\/314
\n                dated 11 May, 91.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                Regarding     the     debit   balance    of
\n                Rs.1,78,841.60 in our above mentioned
\n                account    we     are   hereby   depositing
\n                Rs.20,000\/- (Rupees twenty thousand only)
\n                vide Cheque No.680009 dated 27\/5\/91
\n                drawn on SBI, New Guwahati. We hope to
\n                deposit the balance in 6 equal monthly
\n                installments.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                We hope this will meet your requirement.
\n                We will appreciate a confirmation to this
\n                effect.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                                Page 3 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
 (iii)    Ex.PW-1\/G – letter dated 2nd December, 1991 of<\/p>\n
         Appellant No.1 (signed by Appellant No.3 as Managing<\/p>\n
         Director) in which it was stated as under:-<\/p>\n
                “We wish to acknowledge the receipt of your
\n                letter No.C&I\/91\/1034 dated 11-11-1991.
\n                We have received the statement of
\n                accounts, sent by you, from October, 1989 to
\n                September 28, 1991. We are going through
\n                it.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                Unfortunately, our accountant is on leave
\n                and therefore, we have to request you to
\n                grant us time upto 15th December, 1991,
\n                before we can deal with the matter.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                Please give us an appointment on 16th
\n                December, 1991, to enable us to come and
\n                discuss with you.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
(iv)     Ex.PW-1\/E       letter   dated   6th   December,   1991        of<\/p>\n
         Appellant No.1 (signed by Appellant No.3 as Managing<\/p>\n
         Director) in which it is stated as under:-<\/p>\n
                “An amount of Rs.20,000\/- was paid to you
\n                vide Cheque No.680009 dated 27\/5\/91
\n                drawn on State Bank of India, Gauhati. It
\n                was duly agreed at that time that you will
\n                favour us with your confirmation that no
\n                interest will be charged on the alleged over
\n                draft amount.      Till date, we have not
\n                received a confirmation from you.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                We had also desired a detailed statement of
\n                account to enable us to verify finally as to
\n                how this over draft had taken place in the
\n                above said account. Please send the same
\n                to us.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                On verification and after receipt of your
\n                confirmation that interest charges will not
\n                be payable by us we would clear the over
\n                draft amount by monthly installments
\n                spread over a period of 6-12 months.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                                  Page 4 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
 7.       From the evidence on record, it is clear that the<\/p>\n
appellants clearly admitted the wrong credit of Rs.1,86,421.57<\/p>\n
in their account and made the part payment of Rs.20,000\/-<\/p>\n
vide cheque No.680009 dated 27th May, 1991 and also agreed<\/p>\n
to pay the balance in installments. However, the appellants<\/p>\n
insisted that the Bank should not charge interest on the said<\/p>\n
amount and, therefore, did not make further payment.<\/p>\n
Needless to state, the suit was decreed against not only the<\/p>\n
company but even its directors. Liability has been fastened<\/p>\n
on its directors merely on account of them being the directors<\/p>\n
of the company.\n<\/p>\n
8.       This   appeal   was    filed   jointly   by   Appellant<\/p>\n
No.1\/Company and its two Directors, namely, Appellants No.2<\/p>\n
and 3. However, during the course of the hearing dated 18 th<\/p>\n
April, 2007, learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that<\/p>\n
he would confine the present appeal only to the decree<\/p>\n
against Appellants No.2 and 3 and Respondent No.2 as the<\/p>\n
liability was of the Company only and the Directors were not<\/p>\n
personally liable. It was, therefore, ordered that the appeal<\/p>\n
shall be heard only on this aspect. The relevant portion of the<\/p>\n
order dated 18th April, 2007 is as under:-<\/p>\n
         “Appellant No.1 is a limited         company
\n         incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956.
\n         Respondent No.1, State Bank of India, has filed
\n         a suit against this company for recovery of
\n         Rs.2,70,000\/-. Along with the appellant No.1
\n         company, three directors of the said company
\n         were also impleaded as defendant Nos. 2 to 4.
\n         By impugned judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                           Page 5 of 9<\/span>
\n          15.9.2001, decree in the sum of Rs.2,70,000\/-
\n         with costs and interest @ 12% p.a. from the
\n         date of filing of the suit till its realization has
\n         been passed against the defendants. Though
\n         the appeal is filed by all these defendants,
\n         learned counsel for the appellants submits that
\n         he would confine his appeal only to the passing
\n         of decree against the defendant Nos. 2 to 4. His
\n         submission is that liability was only of
\n         the company and directors could not be made
\n         personally liable. It is made clear that the
\n         appeal shall be heard only on this aspect.”<\/p>\n
9.       The short question in this appeal is whether the<\/p>\n
Appellant Nos.2 & 3 are liable in the present case.<\/p>\n
10.      The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted<\/p>\n
that the liability was of the Company alone and the Directors<\/p>\n
were not personally liable.\n<\/p>\n
11.      An amount of Rs.1,86,421.57 was wrongly credited to<\/p>\n
the account of appellant No.1-Company on 17th May, 1990<\/p>\n
which was detected by the Bank on 2nd April, 1991 and the<\/p>\n
demand          letter-Ex.PW-1\/D   was   issued   to   the   Company.<\/p>\n
Appellant No.3 was the Managing Director and Appellant No.2<\/p>\n
was the Joint Managing Director of the Company at that time.<\/p>\n
The appellants made part payment of Rs.20,000\/- and<\/p>\n
promised to pay the balance, but did not honour their<\/p>\n
commitment.\n<\/p>\n
12.    In the decision reported as Saurabh Exporters (M\/S.)<\/p>\n
Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Blaze Finlease & Credits Pvt. Ltd. 2006 IV<\/p>\n
AD (DELHI) 343, a suit for recovery was filed against a<\/p>\n
private limited company and its directors and a joint and<\/p>\n
several decree was sought against all of them. The directors<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                                  Page 6 of 9<\/span>
\n raised the similar plea. The learned Single Judge of this court<\/p>\n
lifted the veil and passed a joint and several decree against<\/p>\n
the company and its directors.       The learned Single Judge<\/p>\n
referred to and relied upon the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court in cases of Singer India Ltd. vs Chander Mohan<\/p>\n
Chadha & Ors.<\/a> reported as (2004) 7 SCC 1 and Subra<\/p>\n
Mukherjee & Anr. vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors.<\/a><\/p>\n
reported as (2000) 3 SCC 312. It was held as under:-<\/p>\n
       “I am, thus, of the considered view that the
\n       principles laid in the judgments referred to
\n       aforesaid for lifting of the corporate veil are
\n       satisfied in the present case. It has already been
\n       observed that the concept of corporate entity
\n       was evolved to encourage and promote trade
\n       and commerce, but not to defraud people. The
\n       present case is one where clearly the plaintiff is
\n       sought to be defraud of the amount of Rs.15
\n       lakhs under the cloak of a corporate entity of
\n       defendant No.1 company and, thus, such a
\n       corporate veil must be lifted especially taking in
\n       to consideration that defendant No.1 company
\n       was only a family arrangement of the remaining
\n       defendants.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
13.      We agree with the ratio of the above case.               The<\/p>\n
concept of corporate entity was evolved to encourage and<\/p>\n
promote trade and commerce but not to commit illegalities or<\/p>\n
to defraud people. Where, therefore, the corporate character<\/p>\n
is employed for the purpose of committing illegality or for<\/p>\n
defrauding others, the court would ignore the corporate<\/p>\n
character and will look at the reality behind the corporate veil<\/p>\n
so as to enable it to pass appropriate orders to do justice<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                               Page 7 of 9<\/span>
\n between the parties concerned.       In the present case also<\/p>\n
public money has been misappropriated by the appellants<\/p>\n
who time and again promised to return the money in<\/p>\n
installments but their intention appear to have turned<\/p>\n
dishonest and they chose to misappropriate the money. The<\/p>\n
examination of the appellant would reveal as to what<\/p>\n
happened to the money and how the appellant were running<\/p>\n
the affairs of the company.       Therefore, before lifting the<\/p>\n
corporate veil, we would like to examine appellant Nos. 2 and<\/p>\n
3 under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.<\/p>\n
14.      There is another aspect of this matter. Appellant No.3<\/p>\n
was the Managing Director and Appellant No.2 was the Joint<\/p>\n
Managing Director when Rs.1,86,421.57 was wrongly credited<\/p>\n
to the account of Appellant No.1\/Company and they became<\/p>\n
aware of the said mistake upon being pointed out by the<\/p>\n
Bank. Appellants No.2 and 3 may have misappropriated the<\/p>\n
aforesaid amount. Whether that money was misappropriated<\/p>\n
by Appellant No.1 or by Appellants No.2 or 3, is within their<\/p>\n
specific knowledge. Under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence<\/p>\n
Act, where any fact is specifically within the knowledge of a<\/p>\n
person, the onus to prove that fact is upon him. As such, onus<\/p>\n
to prove how the amount in question was misappropriated<\/p>\n
was on the Appellants. Appellants No.2 and 3 did not lead any<\/p>\n
evidence that they have not personally misappropriated the<\/p>\n
amount in question. In the absence of any positive evidence<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                           Page 8 of 9<\/span>
\n having been led by the Appellants, an inference can be drawn<\/p>\n
that Appellants No.2 & 3 have misappropriated the Bank’s<\/p>\n
money and they can be held jointly and severally liable.<\/p>\n
However, before drawing such an inference, we would like to<\/p>\n
examine appellants No. 2 & 3 on this aspect also.<\/p>\n
15.      In view of the above, we hereby direct appellants No.<\/p>\n
2&3 to appear before this Court on 2nd March, 2009 for<\/p>\n
examination under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act,<\/p>\n
1872. We make it clear that we are passing this order in view<\/p>\n
of the special circumstances of the case and the public money<\/p>\n
involved.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                            (J.R. MIDHA)
\n                                               JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                    (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
\n                                           JUDGE
\n28th November, 2008
\ns.pal<\/p>\n
RFANo.46\/2002                                          Page 9 of 9<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 Author: Pradeep Nandrajog * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No.46\/2002 Reserved on : 23rd September, 2008 % Date of decision: 28th November, 2008 ASHISH POLYFIBRES (BIHAR) LTD. …Appellant Through: Mr. K.K. Bhuchar, Adv. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAshish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2012,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008"},"wordCount":2012,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008","name":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-06T03:44:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashish-polyfibres-bihar-ltd-vs-state-bank-of-india-on-28-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ashish Polyfibres (Bihar) Ltd. vs State Bank Of India on 28 November, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6563","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6563"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6563\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}