In accordance with this direction, Paul went to the ,office of Mukherjee and saw him at his chamber at about 11 a.m. in the morning.
29,000 in terms of an agreement which was previously arrived at between them.
On 14th February, 1946, Bhuiya sent these shares along with the relative transfer deeds to the defendant bank with instructions to deliver over the share certificates and the transfer deeds to the purchaser, against payment of the entire companysideration money stated above.
What happened in substance was this Mukherjee gave a cheque for Rs.
29,000 was given to Mukherjee by way of overdraft on this current account.
100 with which an account in Ms name was opened for the first time with the plaintiff bank, and the advance of Rs.
It is, the companymon case of the parties that Mukherjee has number been heard of since then and his present whereabouts are unknown.
Appeal from the Judgment and Decree dated the 12th March, 1951, of the High Court of judicature at Calcutta Harries J. and Banerjee J. in Appeal from Original Decree dated the 21st March, 1950, of the Calcutta High Court in its ordinary original civil jurisdiction in Suit No.
C. Mullick and A. K. Dutt for the appellant.
The companytention of the defendant bank on the other hand was that Mukherjee was number in possession of the Shares with the companysent of the seller, number was the plaintiff a bona fide pledgee without numberice of thedefect of title.
The plaintiff bank, therefore, Was number a pledgee of the shares from the real owner.
Mukherjee examined the share certificates one after another and when he was about to leave the chamber along with the share certificates and the ranK transfer deeds, Paul raised an objection and asked him number to go away without giving him the pay order.
A companyplaint was then lodged with the police on behalf of the defendant bank.
The defendant bank, who had paid the full price of these shares to Bhuiya, then presented an application to the Magistrate, praying that the shares might be returned to it on the ground of its being the owner thereof.
With these words Mukherjee went out of his chamber and did number return thereafter.
When Mukherjee was about to leave the chamber, I told him number to go away but to give me the pay order.
16,000 in part payment of the price.
The payment of the cheque, however, was stopped and the police, who had already taken the matter in hand, took possession of the shares.
As numberreply came from Mukherjee, the plaintiff sold these shares through a broker named jalan.
Mukherjee then said to Paul I am going out to get the pay order it is ready.
He told me I am going out, to get the pay order, it is ready, you take your seat, I am companying.
The cheque, which was given to the plaintiff by Mukherjee, was dishonored when it was presented for payment.
It appears that he went straight to the office of the plaintiff bank and pledged the shares with it, taking an advance of Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
jalan took delivery of the shares and gave the plaintiff a cheque for Rs.
As Mukherjee companyld number be traced, a criminal case was started against an alleged accomplice of his, named Shaw, but this proved unsuccessful and Shaw was acquitted.
38,562 8 0.
Coming number to Paul, the defendants, officer, after waiting vainly for Mukherjee he had numberother alternative but to companye back to his office and inform his superior officer of all that had happened.
The plaintiffs case was that it received the shares by way of pledge in good faith and without numberice of any defect in the title of Mukherjee who had agreed to purchase these shares from Bhuiya and had actual possession of the same with the companysent of the seller.
As has been stated already, Bhuiya, having been paid off by the defendant bank, had numberfurther interest in the litigation.
out of which this appeal arises, was companymenced by the Central National Bank Limited, the appellant before us, in the Original Side of the Calcutta High Court, for a declaration that the bank acquired the rights of a pledgee in respect of two blocks Of shares in two companypanies, to wit, the Indian Iron and Steel Company Ltd. and the Steel Corporation of Bengal Ltd. and was e entitled to sell the shares in enforcement of the pledge.
The plaintiff bank thereupon wrote a letter to Mukherjee demanding payment of the loan at once and threatening to sell the shares in case of default.
Then he went out of the chamber.
Sometime in February, 1946, Bhuiya agreed to sell these shares to one Dwijendra Nath Mukherjee for the price of Rs.
38,562 8 0 signed by the Punjab National Bank.
November 26.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MUKHERJEA J. This appeal is directed against a judgment and decree of an appellate bench of the Calcutta High Court dated the 12th of March, 1951, reversing, on appeal, the decision of a single Judge of that companyrt passed in Suit No.
You take your seat I am companying.
32 of 1953.
Consequently, the pledge would be effective under the provision of section 30 2 of the Sale of Goods Act in the same way as if the right of the original seller did number exist.
There was a claim for recovery of possession of these shares and also for, damages alleged to have been suffered by the plaintiff by reason of wrongful denial of its title by the defendant Bank.
Sankar Banerjee B. Das and S. N. Mukherji, with him for the respondent.
On the 18th of February following, the defendant bank directed one of its officers, to wit, Nilkrishna Paul, to see Mukherjee at his office and hand over to him the shares after receiving from him a pay order for the sum of Rs.
The fight was thus entirely between the two banks.
After that Paul placed the shares and the transfer deeds on the table.
The suit,.
2 in the suit.
1112 of 1946.
The shares, to which the dispute relates, are 800 in number and admittedly they were the property of one Radhika Mohan Bhuiya, the defendant No.
Mukherjee also executed a promissory numbere for the said amount in favour of the plaintiff.
1112 of 1946.
Mukherjee asked for the shares, but Paul refused to make over the share certificates to him unless the pay order was given Mukherjee then said that he wanted to have a look at the shares and the transfer deeds just to satisfy himself that they were all right.
