CHANDRADHAR GOSWAMI & ORS. versus THE GAUHATL BANK LTD.

CHANDRADHAR GOSWAMI & ORS. versus THE GAUHATL BANK LTD.

Liability for the alleged advance of Rs. 10,000 cannot be fastened on the appellants based solely on an entry in the bank's account books or a certified copy thereof in absence of independent evidence, as required by s. 34 of the Evidence Act; the suit for sale under the mortgage was within limitation, but the claim for personal liability was barred by limitation.

Parties
Appellants: Chand Rad Har Goswami & Ors.; Respondent: The Gauhati Bank Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 October 1966
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Decree of the Assam and Nagaland High Court Dated August 1, 1960
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Entries in Bank's Books of Account as Evidence, Certified Copies Under Bankers' Books Evidence Act, Limitation of Suits on Mortgage Deeds, Personal Liability Under Mortgage Deeds
Banking Law Evidence Law Limitation Law Civil Procedure Entries in Bank's Books of Account as Evidence Certified Copies Under Bankers' Books Evidence Act Limitation of Suits on Mortgage Deeds Personal Liability Under Mortgage Deeds

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chand Rad Har Goswami & Ors.

Appellants

The Gauhati Bank Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Decree of the Assam and Nagaland High Court Dated August 1, 1960

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the certified copy of the entry relating to the loan of Rs. 10,000 in the account books sufficed as evidence of the loan to the appellants.
  2. 2 Whether the suit was within the period of limitation.

Ratio Decidendi

Liability for the alleged advance of Rs. 10,000 cannot be fastened on the appellants based solely on an entry in the bank's account books or a certified copy thereof in absence of independent evidence, as required by s. 34 of the Evidence Act; the suit for sale under the mortgage was within limitation, but the claim for personal liability was barred by limitation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part.

Orders

  • Trial court to modify the preliminary decree: The amount due on April 9, 1953 is Rs. 15,956/7/- plus compound interest at 6% per annum with monthly rests, minus Rs. 1,498/10/3 and Rs. 100 as shown paid on May 14, 1948 and November 24, 1949; thereafter 6% per annum simple interest will run.
  • No personal decree shall be passed; only a decree for sale of mortgaged property.