- (1.) DENUDED of detail, no longer in the realm of controversy, the single question, raised upon this revisional application, is : can a bank, a limited company, with its head office at Comilla, before partition of Bengal in August 1947, converted into the principal office in Pakistan, after Partition, the bank continuing at the same time, since then, as an Indian company with its head office at Calcutta, be made liable at law to repay, here in Calcutta, long after such partition, the money, on account of "service security deposit", put in, at Comilla, on February 7, 1946, by an assistant who, "due to communal disturbances in 1950, was forced to leave" the bank's service at Dacca where the security deposit was then lying ?
(2.) A longish question, no doubt. But it brings out all the features that call attention.
(3.) A learned judge, Small Causes court, Calcutta, answers the question in the affirmative and mulcts the bank in a decree for Rs. 500, just the amount of the security deposit. An application by the bank under section 38 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts act, 15 of 1882, comes to little. The decree recorded by the trial judge stands, the Full Bench seeing no reason why it "should be interfered with. " hence this rule under section 115 of the Procedure Code, 5 of 1908.;