https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301966 The SC dismissed the bank's appeal regarding losses from forged cheques. The bank argued that the customer was negligent in not examining passbooks and statements, claiming estoppel prevented the customer from challenging debits. The SC held that customers have no duty to inform banks of unknown fraud, and mere inaction cannot establish negligence. The bank remained liable for paying forged cheques unless it could prove express contractual conditions or unequivocal ratification. The SC upheld the HC and trial court judgments, emphasizing that banking relationships are built on trust and banks cannot escape liability through customer inaction alone. en-us Wed, 22 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Jul 2025 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301966 The SC dismissed the bank's appeal regarding losses from forged cheques. The bank argued that the customer was negligent in not examining passbooks and statements, claiming estoppel prevented the customer from challenging debits. The SC held that customers have no duty to inform banks of unknown fraud, and mere inaction cannot establish negligence. The bank remained liable for paying forged cheques unless it could prove express contractual conditions or unequivocal ratification. The SC upheld the HC and trial court judgments, emphasizing that banking relationships are built on trust and banks cannot escape liability through customer inaction alone. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 22 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301966