https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466408 Bank was permitted to pursue recovery of loan after pledged goods were destroyed by fire; the court held no legal bar prevents the bank from enforcing its security and making margin calls, and a parallel suit for damages does not restrain recovery. The court construed a contractual exemption clause as covering losses even if negligence is alleged, reasoning that a bank is not an insurer of pledged goods absent express contract; therefore liability remains contractual and limited. Insurance proceeds, if paid, must be adjusted against the bank's claim, with the bank free to pursue any remaining balance by due process. en-us Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Feb 2026 19:24:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466408 Bank was permitted to pursue recovery of loan after pledged goods were destroyed by fire; the court held no legal bar prevents the bank from enforcing its security and making margin calls, and a parallel suit for damages does not restrain recovery. The court construed a contractual exemption clause as covering losses even if negligence is alleged, reasoning that a bank is not an insurer of pledged goods absent express contract; therefore liability remains contractual and limited. Insurance proceeds, if paid, must be adjusted against the bank's claim, with the bank free to pursue any remaining balance by due process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466408