-1-

IN

IN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL

CIVIL

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

FIRST

FIRST

FIRST APPEAL NO.607 OF 1987

APPEAL NO.607 OF 1987

APPEAL NO.607 OF 1987

Vijaya Bank

...Appellant

vs.

Canara Bank and others

...Respondents

Mr.M.S.Bhandari i/b M/s.Madhukar Munim & Co. for the Appellant

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM: A.S.OKA,J.

A.S.OKA,J.

A.S.OKA,J.

DATE

DATE

DATE : JANUARY 31,2007.

: JANUARY 31,2007.

: JANUARY 31,2007.

ORAL JUDGMENT:

ORAL JUDGMENT:

ORAL JUDGMENT:

1. The submissions of the learned Counsel for the Appellant

were heard on 24th January 2007. On that day none appeared

for the first Respondent. With a view to give one more

opportunity to the first Respondent, the Appeal was ordered to

be placed today. Today, when the Appeal is called out none

appears for the first Respondent.

2. The Appellant is the original first Defendant. The

Appellant has taken exception to the Judgment and Decree dated

29th March 1985 passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil

Court, Mumbai in a suit filed by the first Respondent.

3. The case of the first Respondent in the suit is that a

demand draft was issued on 11th October 1975 in the name of

M/s.Shah Navalmal Narendrakumar in the sum of Rs.15,000/-.

The said demand draft was purchased by the sixth

-2-

Respondent-sixth Defendant. The said draft was purchased by

the sixth Respondent from the branch of the first Respondent

at Secunderabad in the State of Andhra Pradesh. According to

the case of the first Respondent, the sixth Respondent posted

the said demand draft to the fifth Respondent at the address

of the fifth Respondent in Bombay. On 21st November 1975, the

Advocate for the sixth Respondent addressed a letter to the

Manager of the Branch of the first Respondent at Secunderabad

informing him that the said demand draft has been lost in the

transit. On enquiry, it was found that the demand draft was

encashed through the Appellant by the second to fourth

Respondents (Defendant Nos.2 to 4 respectively). A criminal

complaint has been filed by the sixth Respondent with the

police and the police authorities arrested the second to

fourth Respondents. According to the case of the first

Respondent, second to fourth Respondents had stolen the demand

draft and opened a bank account with Bandra Branch of the

Appellant in the name and style of M/s.Shah Navalmal

Narendrakumar. The said demand draft was presented to Bandra

Branch of the Appellant for encashment. After the demand

draft was encashed, the amount was withdrawn by the second to

fourth Respondents. It is stated that the sixth Respondent

obtained a duplicate demand draft in the sum of Rs.15,000/-

and the same was encashed through the seventh Respondent

(Defendant No.7). By a letter dated 6th November 1975, the

first Respondent informed the Appellant about the loss of the

-3-

demand draft. By reply dated 13th November 1975, the

Appellant informed the first Respondent that M/s.Shah Navalmal

Narendrakumar opened an account with Bandra Branch of the

Appellant on 24th October 1975 and deposited the said