CANARA BANK Vs. ROOP DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been admitted on the following questions of law:

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that Shri Roop Dutt (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) alongwith one Shri Bal Kishan obtained a loan from the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) for purchase of a truck. Loan of Rs. 1,66,850/ - was sanctioned and availed of by the plaintiff and Shri Bal Kishan. Admittedly this loan amount was not repaid within time. Thereafter, the bank set off an amount of Rs. 28,200/ - lying in the saving bank account No. 2047 of the plaintiff with the bank against the loan amount. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that this amount could not have been set off mainly on the ground that the loan had been availed by two persons and liability to pay the amount was joint liability of the plaintiff and Bal Kishan but the set off had been made from the sole account of the plaintiff. This suit was decreed by the learned trial Court. The appeal filed by the bank was dismissed. Hence, the second appeal.

(3.) AT the outset reference may be made to Clause 14 of the agreement entered into between the bank and the plaintiff and Shri Bal Kishan at the time of the grant of loan. The copy of such agreement is Ext. DW -1/A. Relevant portion of clause 14 reads as follows: