| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1975 SLG 3268 = 1975 SLD 3268 = 1975 PLD 844 |
Court of Special Judge, Karachi
Suit No. 482 of 1969, decided on 9th June 1975.
Presented By: I. Mahmood, J
Mansoorul Arfin for Plaintiff. S. A. Moulvi for Defendants Nos. 1 and 2. A. A. Aziz Munshi for Defendant No. 4.. Defendant No. 3 : - Ex parte.
Suit No. 482 of 1969, decided on 9th June 1975.
Presented By: I. Mahmood, J
Mansoorul Arfin for Plaintiff. S. A. Moulvi for Defendants Nos. 1 and 2. A. A. Aziz Munshi for Defendant No. 4.. Defendant No. 3 : - Ex parte.
THE AUSTRALASIA BANK LTD., KARACHI-Plaintiff
VERSUS
MESSRS SUHAIL & CO. AND 3 OTHERS-Defendants
Law: Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)
Section: 4
Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)
Section: 196, 197
Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)
Section: 85, 19
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) S. 19-Acknowledgment of liability-Promissory note-Not an acknowledgment of existing liability but merely promise to pay certain sum in future-Promissory note-A security rather than acknowledg ment-Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881), S. 4. Lallu Mal v. Pandit Beoti Ram A I R 1924 All. 70 ref. (b) Contract Act (IX of 1872) Ss. 196 & 197-Defendant manager of plaintiff -Bank though not empowered to grant overdraft in question yet plaintiff electing to ratify same by conduct, debiting interest in account, relying on promissory note executed by person securing money on overdraft, and suing on agreement of hypothecation itself-Plaintiff, held, knew unauthorised act of defendant Manager and ratified same by conduct. Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edn., Vol. 25, Arts. 894 & 896 ref. Lakshumanan Chetty and others v. Chidambaram Chetty A I R 1919 Mad. 343 held not applicable.…