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

1987 Supreme(Kar) 110

P.P.BOPANNA, S.G.DODDAKALE GOWDA
S. KOTRABASAPPA – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN BANK, DAVANAGARA – Respondent


Advocates:
B.V.KATAGERI, UDAYA HOLLA

DODDAKALE GOWDA, J.

( 1 ) THE important question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the recipient of a certain sum of money by mistake is required to return the same with interest or not ?

( 2 ) THE circumstances leading to this litigation are as follows : the plaintiff instituted O. S. No. 34 of 1983 on the file of the Civil Judge, davanagere, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- plus Rs. 33,438-75 p. as interest etc. , alleging that the defendant was its constituent from 23-5-1980 to 5-7-1985 maintaining accounts in the name of Sri Kottureshwara Rice Mill and oil Mills; that during that period, i. e. , on 14-6-1980 plaintiff-Bank had received t. T. (Telegraphic Transfer) advice from their R. S. . Puram, Coimbatore Branch to credit to the account of the defendant a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- ; accordingly, this amount wascredited and drawn by the defendant on the same day ; that on receipt of confirmation telegram, dated 21-6-1980, by mistake or oversight a further sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- was credited to the account of the defendant bona fide believing that there was another t. T. Advice to credit the said sum, though, in fact, there was none. The official dealing





















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