BAIJNATH BHALOTIA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 2 is the appellant. The appeal arises out of a suit brought by the State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 1,60,076-4-11 with interest pendente lite and future from the defendants. The case of the plaintiff-Bank was that the defendants had opened a cash credit account with the Bank and had entered into an arrangement that they would pledge goods with the Bank as security against the advances and, later on, on payment of proportionate amount, would take the release of the pledged goods and gradually discharge the loan of the Bank. In addition to this arrangement which was evidenced by the documents of agreement, they had also given letters to the Bank that each one of them will be responsible to the Bank for any act done by other defendants in regard to taking advance and furnishing security of goods. On the date when the suit was instituted, the defendants, according to the plaintiff-Bank, owed Rs. 1,60,076411. I should make it clear that the suit was instituted only on the contract of loan and not on the contract of pledge or any other agreement entered into by the parties in respect of the rash credit account.

(2.) The defence put up by the different defendants was not the same though they were all in common in denouncing the plaintiff's claim. In their respective written statements, each one of them tried to throw the blame on the one or the other of the defendants: particularly defendant No. 2 made it clear in his written statement that he was not responsible for anything done by defendant No. 1 which he alleged to be the fraudulent acts on his part with the motive to deceiving other defendants who were working in partnership with him in carrying on the business of the mills known as 'Shree Bhagwati Rice, Oil and Flour Mills' at Jamui.

(3.) On the trial of the suit, the plaintiff's claim was decreed on contest against defendants 1, 2 and 4 with costs, and it was also declared that the plaintiff-Bank had the first charge on the sum of Rs. 33,959-2-3 which was then in deposit in the State Treasury at Jamui as the sale proceeds of the pledged goods in a criminal action instituted by the Bank against the defendants Against that, defendant No. 2 alone has come in appeal.