Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1981 (2) TMI 248

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the two suits, out of which Civil Revisions arise, took up the plea that the Branch Manager had no authority to sign and verify the plaints and to institute the suits and, therefore, the same cannot proceed. The trial Judge (Judge, Small Cause Court) overruled the objection on the basis of Regulations 76 and 77 of the State Bank of India, General Regulations, 1955(hereinafter called the Regulations) and decreed the suits after giving a finding that the amounts claimed in the suits were due. The judgment debtors filed Civil Revision which came up for consideration before the Additional District Judge, who allowed the same and set aside the judgments and decrees of the Court below, solely on the ground that the Branch Manager, although had the authority to sign and verify the pleadings by virtue of Regulations 76 and 77. But had no authority to institute the suits on behalf of the State Bank of India. The State Bank of India has come up in further revisions to this Court under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. In the other two suits, out of which R. S. A. No. 2997 of 1979 and R. S. A. No. 401 of 1980 arise, the objections of the defendants were that the Branch Manager had ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ide notification dated 20th August, 1979, published on 1st September, 1979, in part II of the Gazette of Government of India, page 99. The management of the affairs of the State Bank has been entrusted to the Central Board was to be guided by the directions of the Central Government as required by Section 17. The Central Board was to be guided by the directions of the Central Government as required by section 18. According to section 21 of the Act. Local Boards are to be constituted at places where the State Bank has a local head office, which are to consist of the members mentioned in the section. The 'Local Board' has been defined in Section 2(dd) to mean a Local Board constituted under Section 21. Section 21B defines the powers of the Local Board in respect of the area served for which local head office is constituted and according to this section. Local Board is to exercise all powers and perform all functions and duties of the State Bank in relation to business of banking and shall also exercise such other powers and perform such other functions and duties as may be conferred on or assigned to it by the Central Board as otherwise prescribed and subject to any other ge....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de and completed on behalf of the State Bank by the Chairman or by an officer or an employee empowered by and under Regulation 76. A reading of Regulation 76 shows that the power of signing the documents has been given to the Vice Chairman, the Managing Directors, the Deputy Managing Directors, the Chief General Managers and such other officers or employees of the State Bank as the Central Bank Board or the Executive Committee may authorise in this behalf by notification in the Gazette of India. In pursuance of the powers conferred under Regulation 76, notification dated 17th September, 1959, was published in the Government of India Gazette, part III section 4, dated 26th September, 1959, by virtue of which it authorised 'Agents' besides other persons, to sign the documents contained in Regulation 76 and therefore by virtue of Regulation 77 an agent would be entitled to sign the pleadings, verify the documents etc. and also to sign generally all other documents connected with the legal proceedings on behalf of the State Bank. Later on, the designation of Agents was re-designated as Branch Managers by virtue of notification dated 231st June, 1972, published in the Governmen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the State Bank of India. Regulation 77 is quite comprehensive. If the words 'generally all other documents connected with legal proceedings whether contentious or non-contentious may be made and completed on behalf of the State Bank ' had not been mentioned in Regulation 77. Something might have been said for the defendants. But the use of the aforesaid words clearly goes to show that the authorised officer has been given power to sign all documents connected with the legal proceedings and one of the documents would be a Wakalatnama which the concerned officer could sign in favour of an Advocate. It cannot be disputed that a Wakalatnama is a document connected with the legal proceedings and when, admittedly, in the present cases, the concerned Branch Managers had executed Wakalatnamas in favour of the counsel who presented the plaints it cannot be said that the presentation of plaints in Courts by the Advocates was not a proper presentations. 7. The aforesaid view of mine finds full support from a Privy Council decision in Delhi and London Bank Limited v. A. Oldham, (1894) ILR 21 Cal 60(PC) ; Chandra Sekhar Zamindari Co. Ltd. B. Ram Kumar Haldar, AIR 1914 Cal 782 : M. C.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Wakalatnamas and the presentations of the plaints by the Advocates is proper institution of the suit. Accordingly the findings to the contrary recorded by the Courts below in all the four cases are set aside. 11. In R. S. A. No.2997 of 1979, one more point arises with regard to limitation. The Courts below in the case out of which this appeal arises, have taken the view that the suit was within limitation against the principal debtors but was time barred against the surety. After hearing the counsel for the parties on this matter at length, I am of the view that the finding recorded by the Courts below on the point of limitation is also incorrect. The facts of the case are that the Branch Manager allowed the defendants the benefit of Cash Credit Account with a limit of ₹ 5000. A copy of the running Account has been produced on the record as Exhibit P. 5, which shows that the persons who were allowed the benefit of Cash Credit Account had been withdrawing and repaying amounts up to the limit of ₹ 5000/- from time to time and on the debit balance, interest was accruing. For such a running account, the limitation is provided under Article 1 of the 1963 Limitation Act.....