Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.80 seconds)
The Indian Bank, Madras vs S. Krishnaswamy And Others on 15 February, 1989 cites

A.R. Krishnaswami Aiyar And Anr. vs The Travancore National Bank, Ltd., ... on 7 December, 1939

In Krishnaswami v. Travan-core National Bank, AIR 1940 Mad 436, it has been held that the amounts can be set-off if on evidence it can be shown that A is solely entitled to the amount standing in name of A and B. Section 171 of the Contract Act deals with general Hen of bankers, factors, wharfingers, attorneys and policy-brokers and it is stated therein that where a member of a firm deposited a lease to secure a particular advance to the firm, it was held that the banker had no lien for the general balance due from the firm. In our view, both the oral and documentary evidence of respondents in this case stands unchallenged, as found by the learned single Judge. We arc of the view that there was no proof by the appellant-bank that monies are owed by the partners in any other capacity also. It has to be seen that on 20-7-1967 the appellant's Esplanade Agent called upon the respondents to adjust the amounts due on the over-draft account and take back the shares at once and that after that adjustment only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was due. In our view, the learned single Judge is right in holding that there is no consideration for the respondents-firm to stand sureties for its guarantors. Finally we are not impressed with the arguments of Mr. Dolia, the learned Counsel for appellant-bank, that there are no pleadings under O. VI, R. 4, C.P.C. A reading of the plaints in these two cases shows that everything is pleaded elaborately. In our view, only the oral and documentary evidence on the side of the appellant-bank are lacking. We have already stated how irresponsible the appellant-bank was in not replying Exs. P. 16 to P. 28.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1   2 Next