Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pawnee contract Court: drat madras Year: 2006 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.021 seconds)

Feb 16 2006 (TRI)

H.B. Jayaraj Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and ors.

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Feb-16-2006

Reported in : IV(2006)BC13

..... no longer subsisting and the entire matter was reopened and the bank having accepted the guarantee given by the state of karnataka, there is a deviation, novation of the original contract, and therefore the 3rd defendant, who was the original borrower, was not liable to pay any amount. under the deed of guarantee, the applicant bank agreed to recall the notices ..... whether 3rd defendant/appellant is absolved from the liability by virtue of the guarantee executed by the state of karnataka.7. contract of guarantee is defined under section 126 of the indian contract act, 1872, which states, "a 'contract of guarantee' is a contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case of his default." here the state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 2006 (TRI)

Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Ltd. Vs. Raj Kumar Gupta

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Jul-12-2006

Reported in : II(2007)BC33

..... original application. that shows that the induction of the new partners were not brought to the notice of the appellant. even otherwise, as long as the original contract was not varied, the liability of the surety continues. in fact, the defendant no. 6 has not chosen to revoke his guarantee and, as such, his ..... to the appellant bank. even otherwise, the appellant has not given any consent for the variance of the contract and the original contract remains intact. in fact, even the induction of the new partners were not informed to the appellant, bank, and as a matter of fact, the ..... . the defendant no. 6 further contended that two new partners were inducted into the defendant no. 1 firm, and therefore, there was a change in the contract of guarantee and hence, he is not liable. it is true that new partners were inducted into the defendant no. 1-company, but it was not informed ..... the continuing guarantee would be alive forever and it has got its own limitation i.e. it can be revoked as provided under section 130 of the contract act. in fact, in the guarantee deed itself, it is stated that, "this guarantee shall be a continuing guarantee and it will be in full ..... defendant no. 6 resisted the claim by contending that the defendant no. 1-firm was reconstituted on 25th september, 1998 and there was a change in the contract of guarantee, by which the defendant nos. 7 and 8 also became the partners of the defendant no. 1-company, and in view of the change .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 2006 (TRI)

T. Maragatham and ors. Vs. Bank of Madura Ltd.

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Mar-06-2006

Reported in : III(2006)BC76

..... sonaratn & co. (supra), has clearly held that, "when the debtor deposits with the creditor title deeds of his property with an intent to create a security, the law implies a contract between the parties to create a mortgage and no registered instrument is required as under section 59 as in other classes of mortgage. it is essential to bear in mind ..... .rs. of the 4th defendant, have preferred this appeal.3. the respondent bank filed the suit for recovery of rs. 28,89,943.61 together with future interest at the contract rate. the 1st defendant in the oa, viz. sri palaniappa transports, was a firm owning fleet of lorries and was carrying on business as carriers. the defendants 2 to 4 ..... thereon." that is to say, when the debtor deposits with the creditor the title deeds of his property with intent to create to create a security, the law implies a contract between the parties to create mortgage, and no registered instrument is required under section 59 as in other forms of mortgage. but if the parties choose to reduce the ..... contract to writing, the implication is excluded by their express bargain, and the document will be the sole evidence of its terms." the case of obla sundarachariar and ors. v. narayana .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2006 (TRI)

Veneers Laminations (India) Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Jan-13-2006

Reported in : II(2006)BC140

..... contract, which can only be done by mutual consent of the parties vide section 62 of the contract act, 1872. the court cannot alter the terms of the contract".but however, having opposed the claim of the appellants, the respondent bank had agreed to receive the ..... v. millenium business solutions pvt. ltd. represented by its managing director, ii (2005) bc 79 (db) : 2004(5) ctc 689, it was observed: "a loan is granted in terms of contract and grant of one time settlement or re-scheduling of the loan amount is really a modification of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2006 (TRI)

State Bank of India Vs. Mining Engg. Corporation and ors.

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Jun-27-2006

Reported in : IV(2006)BC97

..... 55(8) held, "award of interest pendente lite and post-decree is discretionary with the court as it is essentially governed by section 34 of the cpc de hors the contract between the parties. in a given case if the court finds that in the principal sum adjudged on the date of the suit the component of interest is disproportionate with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 2006 (TRI)

P.S. Chakarapani Vs. Indian Bank

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Mar-13-2006

Reported in : III(2006)BC223

..... to consider but the law is otherwise. even if the bank fails or refuses to consider, the law will take its own course as provided under section 130 of the contract act, and therefore, the information furnished by the appellant that he had revoked his guarantee would start to run from the moment of the information and it does not require ..... by a party is subject to the revocation and it is not only a safeguard but it is a statutory guarantee given to a party under section 130 of the contract act, 1872, which reads, "a continuing guarantee may at any time be revoked by the surety, as to future transactions, by notice to the creditor". no doubt, the revocation of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2006 (TRI)

Indian Bank Vs. Techno Futura International Ltd.

Court : DRAT Madras

Decided on : Mar-29-2006

Reported in : IV(2006)BC133

..... .it is contention of the learned advocate for the respondents that the courts are not helpless and hapless in overcoming any stringent or onerous clause incorporated in any agreement or contract. in support of his submission, the respondents relied upon the case of smt. periyakkal and ors. v. smt. dakshayani, (supra), wherein it was observed, "4. in the case before us .....

Tag this Judgment!


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