Decided on June 22,1951

Silchar Bank Ltd. Appellant
Pioneer Bank Ltd. And Ors. Respondents


Thadani, C.J. - (1.)THIS is a First Appeal from the judgment & decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Cachar, dated 30 -9 -48, by which he decreed the suit with costs against one Sudhir Ch. Datta impleaded as the fourth deft, in the suit, but dismissed the suit with costs against the remaining defts.
(2.)THE plff, the Silchar Bank Ltd., brought a suit against (1) The Pioneer Bank Ltd. (2) D.N. Bhattacharjee, (3) P.K. Das, (4) Sudhir Ch. Datta, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 6380/ - in the following circumstances:
On 20 -3 -1945, deft. 2 drew a cheque, being cheque No. 51448, on deft. 1 in favour of deft. 4. The following day, 21 -3 -1945, deft. 4 presented the cheque for payment to deft. 1. Deft. 1 endorsed the cheque stating that the cheque would be honoured after payment of the bill for the supply order No. LP/63/45/877, dated 28 -2 -1945, was received from the Deputy Director of Supply (Procurement). Deft 4 thereupon negotiated the cheque so endorsed with the pltf. bank & received the full amount of the cheque. On 11 -4 -1945, the plff. bank presented the cheque to deft. 1 Bank, which returned the cheque stating "We again refer to the previous Memo, dated 21 -3 -1945". The plff. bank again presented the cheque on 26 -5 -1945, but deft. 1 dishonoured the cheque stating that the payment had been stopped by the drawer.

(3.)IT is not necessary to refer to the defence of deft. 1 bank, as the plff. bank has withdrawn she suit against it. Deft. 3 denied that he was acting in collusion with deft. 1. Deft. 2 admitted that he drew the cheque in favour of deft. 4 & also admitted having stopped payment, but alleged that he stopped payment at the instance of deft. 5 who was subsequently made a party. He denied that the plff. bank was a holder -in -due -course. Deft. 4 supported the plff.'s case.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.