UCO BANK versus HEM CHANDRA SARKAR

UCO BANK versus HEM CHANDRA SARKAR

There was no fiduciary or agency relationship between the bank and customer merely by operation of current account and storage/handling of goods; the bank was only a bailee. However, having accepted payment for goods and failed to deliver them or prove delivery, the bank's liability is absolute to return the goods or pay the equivalent value, regardless of the legal characterization of the relationship.

Parties
Appellant: UCO Bank; Respondent: Hem Chandra Sarkar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 April 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal by Special Leave
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Bank as Bailee, Fiduciary Relationship, Bank Customer Relationship, Bailment, Agency

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UCO Bank

Appellant

Hem Chandra Sarkar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal by Special Leave

  1. 1 Whether the bank was agent or bailee in respect of goods entrusted by the customer
  2. 2 Whether a fiduciary relationship existed between bank and customer in respect of the goods
  3. 3 Liability of bank on failure to deliver goods after payment

Ratio Decidendi

There was no fiduciary or agency relationship between the bank and customer merely by operation of current account and storage/handling of goods; the bank was only a bailee. However, having accepted payment for goods and failed to deliver them or prove delivery, the bank's liability is absolute to return the goods or pay the equivalent value, regardless of the legal characterization of the relationship.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Bank liable to return goods or pay equivalent amount to respondent as agreed
  • Costs awarded to respondent