SETH LOON KARAN SETHIYA Vs. IVAN E JOHN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave arises from the decision of the Allahabad High Court in execution first Appeal No. 26 of 1961 on its file. The appellant is the decree-holder. The contesting respondent is the State Bank of Jaipur-to be hereinafter referred to as the Bank-: other respondents are not interested in the decision in this appeal.

(2.) The material facts of the case are few. The appellant was indebted to the Bank. On March 27, 1959, he executed a power of attorney in favour of the Bank. That power of attorney inter alia recited:-

(3.) The objection of the appellant was overruled by the executing court and the execution was directed to proceed. Against that order the appellant unsuccessfully went up in appeal to the High Court. The only question considered by the High Court was whether the power executed in favour of the Bank was a power coupled with interest and hence the same could not be revoked in view of Section 202 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872). The High Court answered that question in favour of the Bank. It held that it was a power coupled with interest and therefore the same could not be revoked by the appellant. In the last paragraph of the High Court judgment it is observed: