Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian contract act 1872 section 141 suretys right to benefit of creditors securities Court: mumbai Page 1 of about 19 results (0.131 seconds)

Shri Mahadev Rama Bhonsle and Others Vs. Central Bank of India and Ano ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1997(3)ALLMR372; 1998(2)BomCR244

..... ) by his lrs. v. state bank of travancore and ors. (supra) and the state bank of saurashtra v. chitranjan rangnath raja and anr. (supra). section 141 of the indian contract act, 1872, lays down :---a surety is entitled to the benefit of every security which the creditor has against the principal debtor at the time when the ..... be a loss by the bank of the securities, which the bank had at the time when the contract of surety was entered into. in these circumstances, the apex court observed that the principle of section 141 of the indian contract act applied to said case and the surety was discharged of the liability to the bank to the extent of ..... the principal debtor is impaired by any action or inaction which implies negligence appearing from lack of supervision undertaken in the contract, the surety would be discharged under the combined operation of sections 139 and 141 of the contract act.7-a. applying the principle laid down by the apex court, we are of the opinion that respondent no. 1 .....

State Bank of India Vs. Moti Thawardas Dadlani and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)109BOMLR483

..... which the person indemnified might have protected himself against or reimbursed himself for the loss.the indian contract act, ix of 1872, section 141, applies this principle to the contract of suretyship: but sections 124 and 125. which deal with the contract of indemnity, are silent on this point only the rights of the promisee are slated ..... aspect too is not dealt with in the indian contract act. it obviously cannot be dealt with by the indian contract act as, as observed earlier, the right of subrogation in respect of a contract of indemnity is. itself not dealt with in the indian contract act.120. section 140 of the contract act reads as under:section 140 rights of surety ..... indemnity-holder has other rights besides those mentioned in section 125.115. the rights of the indemnifier have not been exhaustively dealt with in the indian contract act. the rights conferred on a surety under section 141 have not been conferred expressly on an indemnifier. section 141 reads as under:141. surety's .....

M. RamnaraIn Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the State Trading Corporation of I ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1988Bom45; 1988(2)BomCR59

..... is of his own and return the property back to the mortgagor after the mortgage amount being satisfied. in the case of surety's liability under the contract act, section 141 of the indian contract act, 1872 prescribes that a surety is entitled to the benefit of every security which the creditor has against the principal debtor at the time when the ..... contract of surety ship is entered into, and if the creditor losesor parts with such surety, the surety is discharged to the extent of the value of the ..... of shri cooper that the drawer can file a suit against the acceptor on the bills being dishonoured under section 32 of the act cannot be accepted. section 32 prescribes that in the absence of a contract to the contrary, the acceptor of the bill is bound to pay the amount at or after maturity and further provides :'in .....

Padmakar Vs. State Bank of India and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : II(2007)BC474

..... bank has taken and/or may, hereafter, take any or other such security and that notwithstanding the provision of sections 140 and 141 of the indian contract act, 1872, or any other section of that act or any other law, the guarantor(s) will not claim to be discharged to any extent because of the bank's failure to take any ..... had neglected in taking steps to attach property, which was hypothecated, the appellant was discharged from his liability, in view of the provisions of section 141 of the indian contract act. in the case of state bank of saurashtra borrower had pledged some oil tins, over which godown keeper of the bank had control. the high court held ..... that he stood discharged due to failure of the plaintiff to effect recovery from other securities which the plaintiff had. it was stated that under section 141 of the contract act if a creditor loses or parts with security available to it, surety is discharged. the decree was also challenged on the question of awarding interest @ 15% per .....

Bank of Baroda Vs. Avdoot Bhagwant Naik and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2005Bom224

..... the negligence of the bank.23. in the above context, the hon'ble supreme court with reference to section 141 of the indian contract act, 1872 observed that 'it is true that section 141of the indian contract act has limited the surety's right to securities held by the creditor at the date of his becoming surety and has modified the ..... the defendant no. 1.10. mrs. s. s. naik, learned counsel on behalf of the plaintiff, has placed reliance on sections 126, 127 and 128 of the indian contract act, 1872 and has also placed reliance on the cases reported in m/s. m. ramnarain pvt. ltd. v. state trading corporation of india ltd. air 1988 bom 45, ..... said judgment/decree by placing reliance on sections 135, 139 and 141 of the indian contract act, 1972. mr. ramani, learned counsel has also placed reliance on the case reported in : [1968]3scr724 .12. a brief reference to the relevant sections of the indian contract act, 1872 (act, for short) relied upon by the learned counsels will not be out of context .....

M/s. Mascon Multiservices and Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bharat Oman Re ...

Court : Mumbai

..... under clause 47 and was, therefore, barred from making such a claim. mr. andhyarujina would argue that clause 47 is void under section 28(b) of the indian contract act, 1872. section 28 of the ica runs thus: 28. agreements in restraint of legal proceedings, void. every agreement, (a) by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely ..... of objects and reasons runs thus: statement of objects and reasons the law commission of india has recommended in its 97th report that section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 may be amended so that the anomalous situation created by the existing section may be rectified. it has been held by the courts that the said section ..... approach may be sound in theory but, in practice it causes serious hardship and might even be abused. 2. it is felt that section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 should be amended as it harms the interests of the consumer dealing with big corporations and causes serious hardship to those who are economically disadvantaged. 3. the .....

Dhanrajgirji Narsinggirji Vs. Tata Sons Limited

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1924Bom473; (1924)26BOMLR858

..... perusal of the judgments in bain v. forthergill, which affirmed the rule in flureau v. thornhill (1776) 2 w. bl. 1078, and the terms of section 73 of the indian contract act, it seems to me that the application of the rule is not necessarily excluded. the question must be answered on the facts and circumstances of each case whether that rule ..... not essential to decide the question as to whether the application of the english rule was necessarily excluded in india in virtue of the provisions of section 73 of the indian contract act, then macleod c.j. considered this question in ranchhod v. manmohandas i.l.r. (1907) 32 bom. 165, 9 bom. l.r. 1087, and held that section 73 imposed ..... the rule of english law laid down in bain v, fothergill (1874) l.r. 7 h.l. 158 is necessarily excluded by the terms of section 73 of the indian contract act. i am assuming for the moment that the rule might otherwise apply to the facts in this case i shall deal separately with the question as to whether in the .....

Shankar Nimbaji Shintre Vs. Laxman Supdu Shelke

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1940Bom161; (1940)42BOMLR175

..... plaintiffs' claim against defendant no. 2 must be held to be premature. it is clear from section s 124 and 125 of the indian contract act and article 83 of the indian limitation act that under a contract of indemnity the cause of action arises when the damage which the indemnity is intended to cover is suffered, and a suit brought before ..... promisor engages to save the promisee from loss caused by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of any other person (s. 124 of the indian contract act). the cause of action for a claim against the promisor accrues to the promisee when the latter is actually damnified, and his suit is governed by article 83 ..... or discharge his liability to the creditor and the promise of the guarantor or surety is conditional on the default of that third party. under section 128 of the indian contract act his liability is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, and the cause of action accrues as soon as the latter commits a default, so that under .....

Dhanrajgirji Narsinggirji Vs. Tata Sons Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 92Ind.Cas.225

..... : 23 w.r. 261 which affirmed the rule in flureau v. thornhill (1776) 2 w.m. bl. 1078 : 96 e.r. 635 and the terms of section 73 of the indian contract act, it seems to me that the application of the rule is not necessarily excluded. the question must be answered on the facts and circumstances of each case whether that rule ..... not essential to decide the question as to whether the application of the english rule was necessarily excluded in india in virtue of the provisions of section 73 of the indian contract act. then macleod, (unconsidered this question in ranchhod bhawan v. manmohandas ramji 32 b. 165 : 9 bom. l.r. 1087 and held that section 73 imposed no exception on the ordinary ..... . fothergill (1874) 7 h.l. 158 : 43 l.j. ex. 243 : 31 l.t. 387 : 23 w.r. 261 is necessarily excluded by the terms of section 73 of the indian contract act. i am assuming for the moment that the rule might otherwise apply to the facts in this case. i shall deal separately with the question as to whether in the .....

M/s. Visakha Petroleum Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. B.L. Bansal, Sole Arbitr ...

Court : Mumbai

..... the ordinary tribunals, or which limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights, is void to that extent. amendment to section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 reads thus:- section 28. agreements in restraint of legal proceedings void : every agreement, -- (a) by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing ..... was barred by law of limitation. the petitioner stood discharged of its liability accordingly which was much prior to the amendment to section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872. learned counsel distinguished the judgments of the supreme court relied upon by the respondent no.2. it is submitted that since the liability of the ..... april 2012 in fao(os) 382 of 2007. 20. learned counsel placed reliance on the objects and reasons of amendment to section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 in support of the submission that the said amendment was made effective with retrospective effect. learned counsel also placed reliance on the ninety-seventh report of .....