Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 55 (6.29 seconds)
Documents citing Industrial Finance Corporation Of ... vs Thletdc.An&Naonrosr.E Spinning & ... on 12 April, 2002

Dr.M.I.Itty vs Kerala Financial Corporation on 5 April, 2010

21. Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 stipulates that a W.A.No.2002 of 2006 -:34:- surety is entitled to the benefit of every security which the creditor has against the principal debtor at the time when the contract of suretyship is entered into, whether the surety knows of the existence of such security or not; and if the creditor loses, or without the consent of the surety, parts with such security, the surety is discharged to the extent of the value of the security. The Apex Court has in Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd. v. Cannanore Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. and others, (supra) interpreting Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act held that where there was no deliberate act on the part of the principal debtor which led to the loss of the security and the security was lost not by any definite act of the creditor or the debtor, but by the operation of law over which none of the parties had any control, it cannot be said that the surety is discharged. The Apex Court also negatived the contention that by reason of the non-availability of the security in terms of Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the contract of guarantee stood frustrated. Therefore, the guarantors cannot be heard to contend that as the security offered by the company, the principal debtor, has been lost, they are discharged to the extent of the value of the security. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court, the contention based on Sections 140 and 141 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 cannot be sustained.
Kerala High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sri M Gopala Rathnam vs The Federal Bank Limited on 18 August, 2025

20. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd., v. Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., and Others, 2002 (5) SCC 54 after considering Sections 128 and 141 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 has held that 'liability of the guarantor cannot but be stated to be a strict liability and even if the principal debtor is discharged from his liability unless such discharge is through the act of the creditor without consent of the surety/guarantor, the creditor's right of action against the surety is preserved'. Para 36 of the said judgment which is relevant is extracted hereinbelow:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Defendant No. 2 / vs (A) Martin Toppo on 9 November, 2022

and submits that the plaintiff is estopped and is not permitted in law to deny the validity of the instrument i.e. the Letter of Guarantee as originally made or drawn and in this respect to the learned counsel for the appellant also relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd v. Cannanore Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. and others reported in AIR 2002 SC 1841, para 36 of which reads as under :
Jharkhand High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

Garden Finance Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 25 February, 2004

Strong reliance has been placed on the decisions in Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd. v. Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. 2002 (5) SCC 54 and Suganthi Suresh Kumar v. Jagdeeshan 2002 (2) SCC 420 in support of the contention that the decision of the apex Court is a binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution even if no reasons are given or even if a particular argument is not considered.
Gujarat High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 16 - D H Waghela - Full Document

State Of Gujarat vs State Bank Of Saurashtra And Ors. on 30 July, 2003

12. Mr. S. B. Vakil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1-Bank in both the Appeals, has strongly supported the order passed by the learned Civil Judge and submitted that the learned Judge has discussed at length all the issues which are raised before him and after considering the relevant statutory provisions as well as authorities on the subject, had taken the correct view and the same may not be disturbed by this Court in these appeals. He has also invited our attention to the various statutory provisions and the relevant case-law on the subject. We, however, are of the view, that the view taken by the learned Civil Judge on the issues which are raised before us, is a just and proper view and it is taken in accordance with the statutory provisions and on the basis of the decided case-law, and hence, we are not going into the details of the said discussion, which is otherwise elaborately made by the learned Civil Judge in the impugned order. We however, take note of the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd. v. Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. and Ors., AIR 2002 SC 1841, and while following the said judgment, quoted the following passages, which covers the present controversies :
Gujarat High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - K A Puj - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next