LAWS(KER)-1957-7-3

WOODBRIAR ESTATE Vs. CATHOLIC BANK OF INDIA LTD

Decided On July 02, 1957
WOODBRIAR ESTATE LTD. Appellant
V/S
CATHOLIC BANK OF INDIA LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals out arise of the judgment of the learned Temporary Additional District Judge, Kottayam, in O. S. No. 146 of 1124. A. S. No. 367 of 1954 is by the plaintiff against the disallowance of costs by the learned District Judge. A. S. No. 437 of 1954 is by the defendant, the Catholic Bank of India Ltd., against the main decree passed by the District Judge.

(2.) O. S. No. 146 of 1124 was filed by Woodbriar Estate Ltd., against the Catholic Bank of India Ltd., for recovery of two sums of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 5,000 together with interest thereon. Plaintiffs case was that in pursuance of contracts entered into with Mody and Company, Bombay, the latter company, as purchasers, had sent two demand drafts on 16-3-1946 and 20-3-1946 payable on certain banks at Kottayam. Krishnankutty and Veloo (India) Ltd., were the managing agents for the plaintiff company and one Mr. Veloo was the Managing Director of the Managing Agents Co. The two drafts for Rs.10,000 and Rs, 5,000 were endorsed by the Managing Director, Mr. Veloo, and delivered for collection to the defendant Bank. The defendant Bank instead of collecting the amounts and paying the same to the plaintiff company, credited the same to the personal account of Mr. Veloo in the name of Wilson and Company. Veloo appears to have drawn the amounts and misappropriated the same. The plaintiffs case was that the said payment by the defendant Bank to Veloo was unauthorised and that the plaintiff is in law entitled to recover the said two amounts covered by the two drafts on the ground of conversion and wrongful detention.

(3.) The defendant Bank contested the claim on the ground that they paid over the amount to Mr. Veloo under his instructions and that they had acted in good faith and in due course of business and as such there was no liability in law for refunding the amounts to the plaintiff, especially as the amounts had already been paid over to the Managing Director of the Managing Agents, Mr. Veloo.