EASTERN MERCANTILE BANK Vs. KRISHNA MENON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claim is on the basis of a pronote. The debtor admits the pronote but says that the claim is barred by limitation. It is apparently so but the Staff Security Ledger shows that the pronote amount was advanced on the security of the Staff Security Deposit of larger amount made by the defendant as an employee of the Bank. If so, there can be no question of limitation when the debt is sought to be enforced against the security. Even otherwise there is a distinction between a set off claimed by the Liquidator and a set off under the CPC. For while the latter should be of a legally claimable debt, the former need not fulfil that condition. See Thakur Prasad v. Benares Bank, 1941 All. 278. The claim of the Bank is therefore allowed to be set off against the claim of the debtor under his staff security. The claim will therefore be removed from the list but the defendant will be entitled to proceed only for balance after set off against the claim herein. No costs.