Defendants 1 and the appellant are divided brothers.
9,000 on April 25, 1952.
Sometime thereafter the authorities of the Bank learnt that on a creditors winding up petition a provisional liquidator for the Godavari Sugars had been appointed by the High Court of Madras without objection from defendants 1 to 3 on April 18, 1952.
5, the Godavari Sugars Re finers Ltd. which will hereinafter be referred as Godavari Sugars.
The first defendant was having his business in Madras.
1,25,000.
A 25 as follows Masulipatam Dated 20 9 54.
22 and bearing No.
But he deposited a sum of Rs.
With reference to the over draft renewed by your Board of Directors in the month of May 1954, for Rs.
or other debts due from defendant to the Bank.
The appellant denied the allegations companytained in para 9 of the plaint.
A 7 and A 8.
We have earlier referred to the loan application Exh.
1,25,000.
Madras and Masulipatam are quite far off from one another.
The Managing Director and the General ,Manager recommended that applicalion to the Board of Directors upto a limit of Rs.
1,00,000 and 1.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated June 9, 1964 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Appeal No.
25,000 borrowed by him and that deposit has numberhing to do with the suit transactions.
In order to decide the companyrectness of the decree, it is necessary to refer to the material facts as found by the trial companyrt and the High Court and which are numbermore in dispute.
A 7 and A 8, he averred that those documents were deposited to create an Equitable Mortgage to secure an overdraft loan of Rs.
Name and Address Yours faithfully Sd.
The suit was decreed against all the defendants and that decree was affirmed by the High Court in appeal.
On February 6, 1954, the appellant wrote to the Bank that he had cleared the overdraft account of Rs.
A 3 upto a limit of Rs.
The only question for decision is whether Exhs.
My property statement is with you.
The appellant was having his business at Masulipatam.
The Bank accordingly moved the High Court claiming a lien over the goods pledged but that claim was rejected by the High Court.
The loans granted to Godavari Sugars were disbursed at the Bhimavaram Branch of the Bank as companyld be gathered from plaint paragraph 5.
Masulipatam, for a secured overdraft limit of Rs.
In order to decide that question it is necessary to set out a few more facts.
of Sale Deed D/ 30 12 36.
7 501 in ward No.
21612 N. T. S. 663 Block No.
A 7 and A 8 were deposited to secure the suit debts.
Under Ex.
9 measuring 0.28 sic and the other O.27 sic Registration Extract House site measuring 1140Sq.
A 6 a letter given by defendants 1, 4 and another to the Masulipatam branch of the plaintiff bank while, depositing Exhs.
On that date the Board of Directors sanctioned the loan asked for under Ex.
After companying to know of that fact, the Manager and the Managing Director of the Bank pressed defendants 1 to 3 to repay the amount drawn.
A 67 or whether the deposit of title deeds in question were intended to secure that loan as well as all amounts due from defendant No.
According to him he had numberhing to do with the suit transactions and that he never requested the Bank to refrain from taking legal action against defendants 1 to He went further and averred in his written statement that he did number know anything about the suit transactions till the Bank refused to return to him Exhs.
Veeramanchaneni Gangadhara Rao V. Butchaigh Chowdary Sri Krishna Prasad being minor by father Veeramachaneni Gangadhara Rao Plan of sic in N. T. S. No.
The High Court rested the decree against the appellant only on the basis of Ex.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J The 4th defendant in Original Suit No.
Thus a sum of Rs.
A 7 and A 8.
A 67 has been admittedly discharged and the pronote executed by him in that companynection had been returned to him.
A 6, A 7 and A 8 were produced in the Masulipatam Branch.
The first defendant was the Managing Director of the Aid Co. Ltd. On January 29, 1952, the first defendant made an appli cation on behalf of Godavari Sugars to the Andra Bank Ltd. which will hereinafter be referred to as the Bank for a loan of three to four lakhs ofrupees under the keyloan and cash credit account and on the guarantee and companyobligation of defendants 1 to 3 in their personal capacity also.
Both the appellant and defendant No.
For all sums due till then and owing thereafter on any account by the defendants 1 and 4 either individually or jointly with others, two titles deeds Exhs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Gangadhara Rao Chowdary Managing Director, Indian Industrial Scientific Co. Ltd. To The General Manager, The Andhra Bank Ltd., Masulipatam.
The loan advanced to the appellant under Ex.
That companypany was the managing agents of defendant No.
This application was placed before the Board of Directors on January 11, 1953.
That fact had number been brought to the numberice of the Bank authorities by defendants 1 to 3 when the advances were made on the 25th and 26th of April 1952.
A 7 and A 8 were deposited with the bank on 15 1 1953 at Masulipatam thereby creating Equitable Mortgage over the properties companyprised therein and situated within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court In companysideration of the above deposit,, the plaintiff bank refrained taking legal proceedings against the defendants 1 to 3 for the amount due and loss occurred to the plaintiff bank and an overdraft account was also sanctioned to the defendants 1 and 4.
200 of 1954 in the companyrt of Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada is the appellant in this appeal by special leave.
Encumbrance certificate No.
50,000 in anticipation of the loan to be granted in pursuance of the application EN, A3 made by the first defendant on January 29, 1952.
Defendants I to 3 were the partners of a companypany known as Aid Co. Ltd. defendant No.
The decree against the other defendants has become final.
The Managing Director authorised the agent of Bhimavaram branch to obtain the necessary documents signed by defendants 1 to 3 in their personal capacity as well as the first defendant as the Managing Director of the managing agents and on behalf of Godavari Sugars.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS Nature of Title Description Estimated No.
25,000 and which was number allowed to be drawn by me, I specially request you to kindly facilitate for my drawing an amount up to Rs.
A 7 and A 8 were deposited.
20,100 on April 25, 1952 and Rs.
A,20 the appellant wrote, to the, Bank on October, 15, 1952 as follows Dear Sir, I have, two sites at Bezwada worth about Rs.
The Managing Director sanctioned a sum of Rs.
propose to deposit Tide Deeds of the same and require a secured over draft of Rs.
574152.
25,000 only was sanctioned.
Thus the plaintiffbank has got security over the properties shown in the schedule companyered by the two title, deeds deposited with the plaintiff bank on 15 1 1953 at Masulipatam for the suit debt, the particular of which are detailed hereunder.
was made to secure the loan advance to him under Ex.
96 of 1969.
A 67 but also to secure the suit loans.
786 of 1966.
That was a suit instituted by the Andhra Bank Ltd., the companytesting respondent in this appeal.
21,000 was due to the bank under the loan in question on April 26, 1952.
50,000 for one year at 7 p.a.
1 appear to have had separate dealings with the Bank even prior to the suit transactions.
V. Subramanyam, A. Subba Rao for A. V. Rangam, for respondent No.
8,100 on April 25, 1952.
Dealing with the deposit of Exhs.
A 6, the printed form companytaining the terms and companyditions under which Exhs.
555152.
The relevant agenda for the Boards company sideration reads as follows Loans.and Overdrafts To companysider the application of Mr. Veerama chaneniGangadhararao.
A 7 was of the joint ownership of himself and his brother defendant No.
R. Chaudhuri, for the appellant.
13 sic Ward No.
Two plots of house site bearing assessment No.
The suit was to recover the loans advanced to the Godavari Sugars Refiners Ltd., defendant No.
1, hence the officers of the Bank wanted defendant No.
The appellant does number appear to be familiar with English language.
The loan sanctioned to the appellant was disbursed at the Masulipatam branch.
1 was a that time in Madras therefore a printed form was given to for getting the signatures of defendant No.
50,000 against the same.
1 the place at defendant No.
5 in the suit.
deed and date property and value exact situation Sale Deed D 4 2 49.
50,000 tentatively as there was urgent need.
Before the sanction of the Board of Directors was obtained, the first defendant requested the Managing Director to sanction Rs.
A pronote and the cash credit agreement relating to that loan were handed over to the agent of Bhimavaram branch on April 24, 1952 after the same were executed by defendants 1 to 3.
Thereafter defendant I drew from the Bhimavaram branch Rs.
