https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297441 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of the security held by the Indian Bank against the insolvent. The appellant failed to establish the existence of a specific agreement of suretyship and did not occupy a position analogous to that of a surety under Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs. en-us Tue, 08 Mar 1932 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Sep 2021 18:27:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297441 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of the security held by the Indian Bank against the insolvent. The appellant failed to establish the existence of a specific agreement of suretyship and did not occupy a position analogous to that of a surety under Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Mar 1932 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297441