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

1960 Supreme(Cal) 83

S.C.LAHIRI, R.S.BACHAWAT
KALIPADA SINHA – Appellant
Versus
MAHALUXMI BANK LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.SEN, S.ROY CHAUDHARY

LAHIRI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against an order of P. B. Mukharji, J. dated August 6, 1956 by which his Lordship has settled a list of debtors of the respondent Bank under Section 46-M read with Section 46-D of the Banking Companies Act. By this order the appellant has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 23,671-12-7 to the respondent bank. The bank claimed the amount as being due from the appellant upon an overdraft account. On behalf of the bank the statement of account certified by the Manager was proved. That statement of account showed that a sum of Rs. 30,587-6-0 was due by the appellant to the bank. The matter was directed to be set down for trial on evidence by the learned trial Judge and in support of the claim made by the bank a witness named Jogesh Chandra Pal who was an Accountant of the bank at the relevant time and who was acting as an officer of the bank under the scheme of arrangement was examined. The appellant did not, however, choose to examine either himself or any other witness in support of his case.

( 2 ) THE principal defence of the appellant in the trial Court was to the effect that he was not given credit for certain goods which he had hypothec








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