https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272807 A power of attorney executed and notarised attracted the presumption of due execution, so the plaint was treated as validly authorised and instituted. The guarantee covered principal liability as well as costs and expenses, so the suit disclosed a cause of action against the surety and remained maintainable as a distinct claim from the mortgage proceedings. The surety was not discharged because the creditor's consent decree, execution steps and dealings with the mortgaged security did not amount to statutory discharge, and the guarantee contained effective consent and waiver clauses. Liability was nevertheless confined to the contractual ceiling of Rs. 60 lakhs, with no basis for recovery beyond that limit. en-us Mon, 17 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 May 2018 14:39:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272807 A power of attorney executed and notarised attracted the presumption of due execution, so the plaint was treated as validly authorised and instituted. The guarantee covered principal liability as well as costs and expenses, so the suit disclosed a cause of action against the surety and remained maintainable as a distinct claim from the mortgage proceedings. The surety was not discharged because the creditor's consent decree, execution steps and dealings with the mortgaged security did not amount to statutory discharge, and the guarantee contained effective consent and waiver clauses. Liability was nevertheless confined to the contractual ceiling of Rs. 60 lakhs, with no basis for recovery beyond that limit. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 17 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272807