Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pawnee contract Court: drat madras Year: 2004 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.031 seconds)

Jan 28 2004 (TRI)

State Bank of India Vs. D.V.S. Raju and ors.

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Jan-28-2004

Reported in : III(2004)BC117

..... d3 has nothing to do with these transactions and d3 after his resignation cannot be held liable. since d3 resigned in the year 1981 and subsequent contract has been entered into by the new directors and all the dealings have been done by the new directors, d3 cannot be held liable on the ..... the surety to pay the decretal amount. on such payment he will be subrogated to the rights of the creditor under section 140 of the indian contract act, and he may then recover the amount from the principal and the very object of the guarantee is defeated if the creditor is asked to ..... amount maintained at the red hills (hyderabad) branch, as that branch was handling these transactions. these things clearly establish that there was variation in the contract and there was change in the management of the 1st defendant company even in the year 1982 and the 1st respondent ceased to be the director and ..... respondent and for that variation of contract also the 1st respondent cannot be held responsible. so, viewed at any angle it is crystal clear that the 1 st respondent cannot be held liable ..... and as he also resigned from the directorship in the year 1981, the 1st respondent cannot be held liable. further, there is also variation in that contract and the loan account was converted into cash credit account after ten years and the suit has been filed as against this erstwhile director, the 1st .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2004 (TRI)

S. Sethuraman Vs. Central Bank of India

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Apr-20-2004

Reported in : IV(2007)BC34

..... or condition made in the appellant's letter, would not amount to acceptance by the respondent bank as there is no absolute acceptance as required under section 7 of the contract act.6. the contention of the appellant also, cannot be accepted for the other reason that the respondent never agreed to accept the ots made by the appellant. it is ..... by the tribunal.in any event, there was no consensus ad idem also between the parties.further, any acceptance must be absolute as required under section 7 of the indian contract act, 1872, which states, "in order to convert a proposal into a promise the acceptance must- (2) be expressed in some usual and reasonable manner, unless the proposal prescribes the ..... accepted the sum of rs. 20 lakh in full satisfaction of their claim and duly discharged the promissory note by endorsing full satisfaction thereon. therefore, section 63 of the indian contract act, 1872, apply as there is an accord and satisfaction and the suit of the appellants was liable to be dismissed. it accordingly allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit ..... and, therefore, it should be presumed that a settlement has been reached between the appellant and the respondent. appellant also relies upon illustration 'b' in section 63 of the indian contract act, 1872, which states, "every promisee may dispense with or remit, wholly or in part, the performance of the promise made to him, or may extend the time of such .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //