SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1930 Supreme(SC) 49

Moti Lal Manucha – Appellant
Versus
Unao Commercial Bank Ltd. , Cownpore and another – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
W. Wallach, A.M. Dunne , B. Dube, L.De Gruyther

Lord Tomlin.-

Certain Cawnpore firms, in all or some of which Bisheshar Nath was a partner, drew during the years 1921 and 1922 a series of ten hundis upon a Calcutta firm of Motilal Bisheshar Nath. The partners in the firm of Motilal Bishashar Nath were the appellants and Bisheshar Nath of the ten hundis, eight were accepted in the name of Motilal Bisheshar Nath. by the munim of the firm. The remaining two hundis were drawn by way of renewal of and in substitution for two of the eight accepted hundis, but were never accepted. The eight hundis were discounted by one or other of the respondent banks, and all the hundis were dishonored at maturity. The banks in four suits sued Motilal Bisheshar Nath, and others on the hundis. All four suits were heard together.

Three of the suits related to the six accepted hundis in respect of which there were no renewal hundis given. On 21st September 1923 the Subordinate Judge at Cawnpore made decrees is these three suits for payment by Motilal Bisheshar Nath of the amounts of the six hundis. These decrees were affirmed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on 19th October 1926. The fourth suit related to the remaining two accepted hundis and








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top