ownership of UTI AMC was with the SBI, Bank of Baroda, PNB and
LIC. According to Mr. Bhushan, Mr. Sinha was privy to sensitive
information
jurisdiction of the
Calcutta High Court. The contest was, therefore, directly with PNB which
was described in the plaint as the “acceptor” of the bill ... PNB (respondent no.1) completely denied the case of the appellant-
plaintiff made out in the plaint and was granted leave to defend the suit
approved amount of Rs.3.75
crores towards payment to PNB Capital Finance.”
17. The Trial Court, while entertaining the application filed under
Section
Liquidator, Palai
Central Bank Ltd.. (1985) 1 SCC 45 (pages 50-51), PNB Finance Limited v.
Commissioner of Income Tax I, New Delhi