Free Essays, Term Papers, Research Papers at Anti Essays

TITLE OF THE CASE

Syndicate Bank, Petitioner V. Padmidi Somaiah (died) and another, Respondents.
C.R.P. NO. 4531 OF 1997, D/-13-9-2001.

Contract act (9 of 1872), Ss. 134, 140 – Discharge of surety – “Act or omission of creditor” – Suit filed against both principal debtor and surety - Death of principal debtor during pendency of – Omissions of creditor to bring the legal representatives of principal debtor on record – debt consequently stood discharged – Surety’s right to proceed against principal debtor as provided under S. 140 also lost – liability of surety would be discharged – Decree if passed against surety would be inexecutable.


OBJECTIVES

 To study the various ground of cases & reason for passing this decision

 Giving opinion if we provide judgment in place of judge S. ANANDA

REDDY. J.


INTRODUCTION


This case was filed under contact act 1872 section 134 and 140 of discharge of surety “Act or omission of creditor”. Bank filed revise petition against second judgment debtor, who is the surety for the recovery of the amount due by the principle debtor Pamidi which was died. The respondent filed a counter stating that he was only a surety not the original borrower and he is not liable to pay the money. The petitioner must proceed against the properties of the first judgment debtor. The decree passed is illegal, void and not executable and also the first judgment borrow the money for agriculture purpose which was exempt under income tax act so debt should discharged .so by listening all the referenced evidence court said that petitioner is not entitled to proceed against the surety even in the presence of trial court decree which is not executable. So court passed that the revision petition is without merit and the same is accordingly dismissed, but without costs.

...