In Brief
A bank challenged a High Court order deleting it as a defendant-guarantor from debt recovery proceedings on the ground that another person had substituted his guarantee. The Supreme Court found that the High Court's factual finding—that Sharanpal Singh Juneja had executed a substitute guarantee—was not supported by the record, constituting an error apparent on the face of the judgment. Rather than overturn the judgment in appeal, the Court disposed of the appeal permitting the bank to file a review application before the High Court to place correct facts on record and challenge all errors, with the time limit for filing such review waived.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.