<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1967 (11) TMI 115 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199722</link>
    <description>Liability for a bank debt was examined through joint account participation and collateral promissory notes. The commentary notes that account books, bank testimony and jointly executed documents were relied on to show that both brothers operated the current and overdraft account, while the collateral securities independently supported liability. It also explains that a promise linked to the same overdraft arrangement can amount to sufficient consideration under guarantee principles, so the notes were not treated as past-consideration instruments. On limitation, the discussion refers to a genuine acknowledgment and to a mutual, open and current account, making the claim timely under the applicable limitation rule.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 15:59:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (11) TMI 115 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199722</link>
      <description>Liability for a bank debt was examined through joint account participation and collateral promissory notes. The commentary notes that account books, bank testimony and jointly executed documents were relied on to show that both brothers operated the current and overdraft account, while the collateral securities independently supported liability. It also explains that a promise linked to the same overdraft arrangement can amount to sufficient consideration under guarantee principles, so the notes were not treated as past-consideration instruments. On limitation, the discussion refers to a genuine acknowledgment and to a mutual, open and current account, making the claim timely under the applicable limitation rule.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>