R LILAVATI Vs. BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant 4's revision against the judgement and decree D/-15-7-1983 passed by the I Additional Small Causes Judge, Bangalore City, in S.C. No. 137/82 decreeing the suit against all the defendants including defendant-4.

(2.) The plaintiff granted credit facility to defendants - 1 to 3 in the name of their firm - defendant-1. The first transaction was the demand loan of Rs. 12,000/- and the other was cash credit hypothecation facility to the limit of Rs. 25,000/-. Ultimately after giving deduction to the amounts paid, the suit was filed by the plaintiff Bank for Rs. 8,644-08. Defendant 4 had stood surety for both the loans.

(3.) Defendants 1 to 3 did not contest the suit. It is only defendant 4 that resisted the suit. She raised a contention that as the plaintiff creditor allowed the hypothecated properties to be lost, her liability as a surety stood discharged the second contention urged is that the acknowledgement given by defendants 1 to 3 in order to keep their debts alive does not bind her as she has not signed the acknowledgement.