{"id":113729,"date":"1970-09-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1970-09-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970"},"modified":"2016-06-01T17:18:54","modified_gmt":"2016-06-01T11:48:54","slug":"state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","title":{"rendered":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1971 AIR 143, \t\t 1971 SCR (2)\t 28<\/div>\n
Author: S C.<\/div>\n
Bench: Shah, J.C.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSTATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nELIAS ELIAS & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n04\/09\/1970\n\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nBHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA\n\nCITATION:\n 1971 AIR  143\t\t  1971 SCR  (2)\t 28\n 1970 SCC  (2) 761\n CITATOR INFO :\n D\t    1992 SC1100\t (12)\n RF\t    1992 SC1341\t (12)\n\n\nACT:\nBanking Regulation Act (10 of 1949), s. 45(5)(1)-Clause (ii)\nof  the\t first proviso-Scope of-Second\tproviso-Finality  of\ndecision of Reserve Bank-Extends to what matters.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  respondent was doing the duties of a civil agent  in  a\nBank.  His duties were those of clerk and the salary paid to\nhim  was  that\tof  a  clerk.\tPursuant  to  a\t scheme\t  of\namalgamation   prepared\t by  the  Reserve  Bank\t  under\t  s.\n45(4)(d)(ii)  of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the\tBank\nwas  amalgamated  with the State Bank  of  Travancore.\t The\nrespondent was admitted as an employee of the State Bank and\nwas  allotted the duties of a 'civil agent'.  But the  State\nBank  directed\tthat  'civil agents  should  be\t treated  as\n'subordinate   staff  consisting  of  peons,  watchmen\t and\nsweepers,  whose scale of remuneration was very\t much  lower\nthan   that   of   the\t clerical   staff.    He   submitted\nrepresentations to the authorities which were rejected.\t The\nReserve\t Bank  of India, to which the  matter  was  referred\nunder  s.  45(5) of the Act, held that the  State  Bank\t was\njustified in placing the respondent in the subordinate cadre\nwhich was a residual cadre in the State Bank.\nOn  the question : (1) Whether the decision of\tthe  Reserve\nBank  was final and binding under the second proviso  to  s.\n45(5)(i);  and (2) Whether the terms and conditions  of\t the\nrespondent's service were not affected by the classification\nof his post in the subordinate cadre,\nHELD  :\t (1) The decision of the Reserve  Bank\twhether\t the\nqualifications\tand experience of any of the employees of  a\ntransferor  bank  are  the  same as  or\t equivalent  to\t the\nqualifications and experience of employees of  corresponding\nrank or status of a transferee bank is declared final by the\nsecond\tproviso to s. 45(5)(i) of the Act.  But finality  is\nnot  attached  to any other matter.  In\t the  present  case,\nhowever,  the Reserve Bank purported to determine  that\t the\nrank and status of civil agents working in the original Bank\ncorresponded  with the rank and 'status of  the\t subordinate\ncadre  under the State Bank.  That was a matter which  could\nnot  be\t referred  to the Reserve  Bank\t and,  its  decision\nthereon was not final. [32 C-D; 33 A-D]\n(2)Under  cl.  (ii)  of the proviso to\ts.  45(5)  (i),\t a\ntransferee  bank must grant the same remuneration  and\tsame\nterms  and  conditions\tof  service  as\t are  applicable  to\nemployees of corresponding rank or status of the  transferee\nbank  subject  to the qualifications and experience  of\t the\nemployee  being the same as or equivalent to those  of\tsuch\nother  employees of the transferee bank.  That is, a  person\nperforming certain duties in a transferor bank when admitted\ninto the service of the transferee bank must be fitted in  a\ncadre which is equivalent in status and rank with the status\nand  rank  of  the employees in\t the  transferor  bank.\t  In\ngrading\t him into the cadre of equivalent status  and  rank,\nexperience  and\t qualifications may be taken  into  account,\nbut,  the rank and status enjoyed by him in  the  transferor\nbank cannot be ignored. [33 F-H; 34 A-D]\n29\nIn  the\t present case, it was conceded that  the  respondent\nsatisfied   the\t  conditions   as  to\trank,\tstatus\t and\nqualifications of a clerk in the State Bank and it was\tonly\ncontended  that he did not have the requisite experience  On\nthe ground of lack of experience the respondent could not be\ndeprived  of  his rank and status in  the  transferee  Bank.\nAlso, the decision of the Reserve Bank that the\t subordinate\ncadre was a residual cadre is not supported by any evidence.\nTherefore,  it\twas not open to the State Bank\tto  fit\t the\nrespondent, who was performing the duties of a clerk in\t the\noriginal bank, into a subordinate cadre manned by  employees\nperforming duties, which are not clerical, but of peons\t and\nthe like. [33 D-F; 34 D]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.  ‘1720  of
\n1968.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal\tby special leave from the judgment and\torder  dated
\nNovember 2, 1967 of the Kerala High Court in Writ Appeal No.
\n64 of 1966.\n<\/p>\n
M.C.  Chagla, P. C. Bhartari and J. B.\t Dadachanji,  for
\nthe appellant.\n<\/p>\n
K. Jayaram, for respondent No. 1.\n<\/p>\n
Niren De, Attorney General and I. N. Shroff, for  respondent
\nNo. 2.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nShah, J. K. E. Elias-first respondent herein-was an employee
\nof the Orient Central Bank Ltd.\t He was posted to do duty as
\na  “Civil  Agent”.  The Orient Central Bank Ltd.  was  amal-
\ngamated\t with the Kottayam Bank Ltd.  The  amalgamated\tbank
\nwas  named the Kottayam Orient Bank Ltd.-hereinafter  called
\n‘the K. 0. Bank.’ The services of Elias were transferred  to
\nthe K. 0. Bank.\t Elias continued to perform the duties of  a
\n“Civil\tAgent”\tof that Bank, and  certain  specific  duties
\nrelating  to  court cases were assigned to him by  the\tK.O.
\nBank.\tThe  K. 0. Bank issued a  circular  sanctioning\t the
\nsalary\tand allowances payable to all its subordinate  staff
\nunder three heads-Assistants, Clerks and Peons.\t The  salary
\nand    allowances    paid   to\t the   clerks\t were\t Rs.\n<\/p>\n
46-2-50-3-80-EB-4-100 plus dearness allowance Rs. 20\/-.\t  No
\nseparate scale was fixed for “Civil Agents” and it is common
\nground\tthat  Elias  was given\tthe  salary  and  allowances
\npayable to Clerks.\n<\/p>\n
Pursuant to a scheme of malgamation prepared by the  Reserve
\nBank under s. 45(4)(d)(ii) of the Banking Regulation Act  10
\nof 1949, the K. 0. Bank was amalgamated with the State\tBank
\nof  Travancore-hereinafter called the “State  Bank”.   Under
\nthat scheme, Elias was admitted as an employee of the  State
\nBank and he was allotted the duties of a “Civil Agent”.\t  To
\nfix  the  remuneration and the terms and conditions  of\t the
\nemployees under the State
\n30<\/span>
\nBank,  the  Board of Directors constituted  a  Committee  to
\nassess the qualifications of all its employees.\t Pursuant to
\na  report  received  from  the\tCommittee,  the\t State\tBank
\ndirected that the “Civil Agents” be treated as\t“subordinate
\nstaff”\t and  that  their  remuneration\t be  refixed.\t The
\n“subordinate  staff” consisted of peons, watchmen,  sweepers
\nand   employees\t with  similar\tduties.\t  Their\t  scale\t  of
\nremuneration  was Rs. 28-2-86-1-96-EB-1-101.  The  scale  of
\nremuneration of the clerical staff was Rs.  11 2-307.
\nElias submitted a representation to the Deputy General Mana-
\nger  that in absorbing him in the subordinate staff  he\t was
\ndenied the statutory guarantee of remuneration and terms and
\nconditions of service.\tThis representation was rejected  by
\nthe Deputy General Manager by letter dated October 19, 1963,
\nand   Elias  was  informed  that  “having  regard   to\t his
\neducational  qualifications  and  experience  it  had\tbeen
\ndecided\t by the State Bank to place him in  the\t subordinate
\ncadre.”\t Elias made a representation to the General  Manager
\nwhich was rejected on December 11, 1963 and he was  informed
\nthat the Bank was unable to grant his request for absorption
\ninto the “clerical cadre”.\n<\/p>\n
Elias then moved a petition in the High Court of Kerala\t for
\na writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ quashing\t the
\norders dated October 19, 1963 and December 11, 1963,  fixing
\nhis rank ,in the cadre of subordinate staff.  A Single Judge
\nof the High Court dismissed the petition.  He observed\tthat
\nsince  there  was no post of “a Civil Agent”  in  the  State
\nBank,  that  Bank  was\tcompetent  to  place  Elias  in\t the
\nsubordinate  cadre.  The learned Judge also  observed  that,
\nhaving\t regard\t to  the  educational\tqualifications\t and
\nexperience  Elias  was properly placed in  the\t“subordinate
\ncadre”, and no ground was made out to quash the fixation  of
\nthe   rank  and\t status\t based\ton  an\tassessment  of\t his
\nqualifications and experience.\n<\/p>\n
Elias appealed to a Division Bench of the High Court.\tDur-
\ning  the pendency of the appeal, the State Bank applied\t for
\ntaking\ton record the decision dated September 15, 1967,  of
\nthe  Reserve Bank of India, holding that the State Bank\t was
\njustified in not giving Elias the status of a clerk, and  in
\nplacing\t him in the residual classification of\t“subordinate
\nstaff”.\t  This\tdocument was admitted on  the  record.\t The
\nCourt\tin   allowing  the  appeal  observed   that   on   a
\nconsideration  of  the\trelevant  circumstances,  Elias\t was
\nentitled  to the rank and status of a clerk under the  State
\nBank,  and the order of the Reserve Bank being in  violation
\nof  the\t statutory  provisions\tcontained  in  the   Banking
\nRegulation Act, 1949, the orders dated October 19, 1963\t and
\nDecember 11. 1963 were liable to be set aside.\tThis  appeal
\nhas been filed with special leave granted by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
31<\/span><\/p>\n
Two  contentions were urged by the State Bank in support  of
\nthe appeal:\n<\/p>\n
\t      (1)that  the decision of the  Reserve  Bank
\n\t      dated September 15, 1967, was final by  virtue
\n\t      of  s. 45(5)(i) read with proviso (ii) of\t the
\n\t      Banking Regulation Act X of 1949 and could not
\n\t      be ignored by the Court; and
\n\t      (2)that  the State Bank having  assured  to
\n\t      Elias the remuneration which he was drawing, a
\n\t      mere   classification  of\t his  post  in\t the
\n\t      subordinate cadre did not affect the terms and
\n\t      conditions  of  his service  under  the  State
\n\t      Bank.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Section\t 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949,  by  sub-s.
\n(4) authorises the Reserve Bank in certain eventualities  to
\nprepare a scheme for reconstruction of a banking company  or
\nfor  amalgamation  of  the banking company  with  any  other
\nbanking\t institution.\tBy  sub-s. (5),\t insofar  as  it  is
\nrelevant, it is provided :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “The  scheme aforesaid may contain  provisions
\n\t      for  all\tor  any\t of  the  following-matters,
\n\t      namely\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)the  continuance of the services of  all
\n\t      the  employees of the banking company  (except
\n\t      such  of them as not being workmen within\t the
\n\t      meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act,  1947,
\n\t      are  specifically mentioned in the scheme)  in
\n\t      the  banking  company  itself  on\t its  recon-
\n\t      struction,  or,  as the case may\tbe,  in\t the
\n\t      transferee  bank at the same remuneration\t and
\n\t      on  the same terms and conditions of  service,
\n\t      which  they were getting or, as the  case\t may
\n\t      be,  by  which they were being  governed,\t im-
\n\t      mediately\t before\t the date of  the  order  of
\n\t      moratorium :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Provided\tthat  the  scheme  shall  contain  a
\n\t      provision that–\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)………………………………………\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (ii)the  transferee bank shall pay or  grant
\n\t      not  later  than the expiry of  the  aforesaid
\n\t      period  of three years, to the said  employees
\n\t      the  same remuneration and the same terms\t and
\n\t      conditions of service as are applicable to the
\n\t      other  employees\tof  corresponding  rank\t  or
\n\t      status  of the transferee bank subject to\t the
\n\t      qualifications  and  experience  of  the\tsaid
\n\t      employees\t being the same as or equivalent  to
\n\t      those  of such other employees of\t the  trans-
\n\t      feree bank
\n\t      Provided\tfurther\t that if in any\t case  under
\n\t      clause (ii)of the first proviso any doubt
\n\t      or difference arises as
\n\t      32<\/span>
\n\t      to  whether the qualifications and  experience
\n\t      of  any of the said employe s are the same  as
\n\t      or   equivalent  to  the\tqualifications\t and
\n\t      experience   of\tthe   other   employees\t  of
\n\t      corresponding rank or status of the transferee
\n\t      bank,   the  doubt  or  difference  shall\t  be
\n\t      referred\tto the Reserve Bank  whose  decision
\n\t      thereon shall be final;”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In  exercise of the authority under sub-ss. (4) & (5) of  s.
\n45  of\tthe Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the  Reserve\tBank
\nprepared a scheme under which employees under the K. 0. Bank
\nwere  transferred to the employment of the State Bank.\t The
\nterms of cl. (ii) ,of the first proviso to sub-s. (5) of  s.
\n45 were expressly included in ,the scheme.
\nThe decision of the Reserve Bank that the qualifications and
\n,experience  of any of the employees of the transferor\tbank
\nare  the  same as or equivalent to  the\t qualifications\t and
\nexperience  of the other employees of corresponding rank  or
\nstatus of the transferee bank, is declared by the Act to  be
\nfinal.\t But  finality is not attached to any  other  matter
\ndecided\t by  the  Reserve Bank.\t The Reserve  Elank  by\t its
\ndecision purported to determine that the rank and status  of
\nthe Civil Agents working in the K. 0. Bank corresponded with
\nthe rank and status of the subordinate cadre under the State
\nBank.\tThe Reserve Bank of India observed that\t “the  Civil
\nAgent  has  nothing to do with the office work in  the\tBank
\njust  as in the case of clerks and other employees  and\t his
\nwork is essentially different from the work of the  ordinary
\nstaff in the bank”.  The Bank then proceeded to observe that
\n:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “In fitting an employee of the transferor bank
\n\t      into the transferee bank, the rank and  status
\n\t      of  the  employee as also the  nature  of\t the
\n\t      duties  performed\t by  the  employee  in\t the
\n\t      transferor  bank have to be ascertained.\t The
\n\t      mere fact that the employee in transferor bank
\n\t      bore  a  particular designation  either  as  a
\n\t      clerk or otherwise does not conclude the issue
\n\t      and that does not necessarilly follow that  he
\n\t      should, in the transferee bank, be placed in a
\n\t      post having the same designation……….  On
\n\t      examining\t the  position the Reserve  Bank  of
\n\t      India is of opinion that the duties which\t the
\n\t      employee\twas  discharging in  the  transferor
\n\t      bank do not relate to the duties which a clerk
\n\t      has to do in the office.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In  the view of the Bank the duties performed by  the  Civil
\nAgent were “essentially different from those of a clerk\t and
\ncalled for a much lower degree of qualifications, skill\t and
\ncompetence than those which a clerk normally brings to\tbear
\non  his work”, and since the subordinate cadre of the  State
\nBank in which Elias was
\n33<\/span>
\nfitted\twas “in effect a residual classification” there\t was
\nno change and the Bank was justified in placing him in\tthat
\nclassification.\t  It  was also observed that there  was\t “no
\nchange\tin the work” allotted to Elias, nor was he  expected
\nto  do\tthe  work  of a chaprasi or  a\tpeon  and  that\t his
\nemoluments  were better than those in the  transferor  bank.
\nThe  fact that prior to the fitment in the transferee  bank,
\nin  terms of the provisions of paragraph-15 of\tthe  Scheme,
\nElias  was addressed as a civil clerk did not confer on\t him
\nthe  status  of\t a  clerk in  the  transferee  bank.   These
\nobservations  relate to matters which could not be  referred
\nto  the\t Reserve Bank and the decision of the  Reserve\tBank
\nthereon is not made final under the second proviso to sub-s.
\n(5)(i)\tof s. 45 of the Act.  Only the question whether\t the
\nqualifications and experience of any of the empolyees of the
\ntransferor  bank  are  the  same as  or\t equivalent  to\t the
\nqualifications\tand  experience of the\tother  employees  of
\ncorresponding  rank  or status under cl. (ii) of  the  first
\nproviso is intended to be referred to the Reserve Bank.\t  In
\nthat  view  the\t first argument advanced on  behalf  of\t the
\nappellant must be rejected.\n<\/p>\n
It is said that Elias “had studied only upto 5th Form”.\t But
\nthat is not decisive of the corresponding rank or status  in
\nwhich  “he  could be fitted” in the State Bank.\t  Elias\t was
\nemployed in the K. 0. Bank as a Civil Agent.  The duties  of
\na  Civil  Agent\t were  not menial.  In the  K.\t0.  Bank  no
\nseparate scale was prescribed for the post of a Civil Agent.
\nThe salary paid to Elias was that of a Clerk and his  duties
\nwere  those  of a clerk.  In the and there was\tno  separate
\nclassification\tof the office of a Civil     Agent.\t The
\nsubordinate cadre consisted of peons, watchmen and  sweepers
\nand  of\t employees performing similar duties,  and  a  Civil
\nAgent  performing  duties which could not  appropriately  be
\nplaced\tin that classification. The decision of the  Reserve
\nBank that the\t    subordinate cadre was a residual  cadre,
\nis,  in our judgment, not supported by any evidence. It\t was
\nconceded before the High Court that Elias satisfied ”  three
\nconditions as to the rank-, status and qualifications” of  a
\nclerk in the State Bank. It was only\tthe  said  employees
\nbeing the same as or equivalent to those of  the       first
\nproviso\t to  s. 45(5)(i) the transferee bank must grant\t the
\nsame  remuneration  and\t the same terms\t and  conditions  of
\nservice as are applicable to employees of corresponding rank
\nor   status  of\t the  transferee  bank\t  subject   to\t the
\nqualifications and experience of   the\t  said\t   employees
\nbeing the same as or equivalent to those of  such      other
\nemployees of the transferee bank. The guarantee under  cl.\n<\/p>\n
(i)  of\t s.  45,(5) of the Act does  not  cover\t merely\t the
\nremuneration : it covers the terms and conditions of service
\nas well . I    would  be a gross denial of the guarantee  if
\nthe  employee is not given the rank and status which he\t had
\nin the transferor bank. It is, in  our judgment, not open to
\nthe transferee bank to “fit” an emplo-\n<\/p>\n
34<\/span><\/p>\n
yee of the transferor bank performing the duties of a  clerk
\ninto  a\t subordinate cadre manned  by  employees  performing
\nduties\twhich  are  not clerical, but  of  peons,  watchmen,
\nsweepers and the like.\n<\/p>\n
The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, guarantees the same  terms
\nand  conditions\t of  service, and  the\ttransferee  bank  is
\nentitled to “fit” the employees of the transferor bank\tinto
\nthe  corresponding- rank or status.  In doing so it ‘has  to
\ntake into account tile qualifications and experience of\t the
\nemployees  of  the  transferor bank.  But  in  “fitting”  an
\nemployee  into\tthe  transferee bank, the  rank\t and  status
\nenjoyed\t by  an employee in the transferor  bank  cannot  be
\nignored.    A  person  performing  certain  duties  in\t the
\ntransferor  bank  when.\t admitted into the  service  of\t the
\ntransferee  bank-  may be so “fitted” in a  cadre  which  is
\nequivalent  in status and rank with the status and  rank  of
\nthe  employees\tin the transferee bank, but in\tgrading\t him
\ninto the cadre of equivalent status and rank, experience and
\nqualifications must be taken into account. Oil the ground of
\nlack  of  experience and qualifications a person  cannot  be
\ndeprived  of  his rank and status in  the  transferee  bank.
\nClause (ii) to the first proviso of s. 45(5)(i) does not, in
\nour  judgment.\tauthorise the transferee bank  to  “fit”  an
\nemployee  in’ the transferee bank into a post with rank\t and
\nstatus\tlower  than  the  rank and  status  enjoyed  by\t the
\nemployee  in the transferor bank, To accept  the  contention
\nraised\ton behalf of the State Bank is ill effect to  defeat
\nthe  guarantee\trelating  to the  terms\t and  conditions  of
\nservice\t under\tcl. (i) of s. 45(5) and\t the  first  proviso
\nthereto.\n<\/p>\n
In  our judgment tile High Court was right in  holding\tthat
\nthe  orders passed by the State Bank “fitting” Elias into  a
\nsubordinate cadre infringed the guarantee under s.  45(5)(i)
\nof the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.\n<\/p>\n
The  appeal fails and is dismissed with costs in  favour  of
\nElias.\n<\/p>\n
V.P.S.\t\t\t      Appeal dismissed.\n35<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 Equivalent citations: 1971 AIR 143, 1971 SCR (2) 28 Author: S C. Bench: Shah, J.C. PETITIONER: STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE Vs. RESPONDENT: ELIAS ELIAS & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04\/09\/1970 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-113729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nState Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970\",\"datePublished\":\"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\"},\"wordCount\":2441,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\",\"name\":\"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970","datePublished":"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970"},"wordCount":2441,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970","name":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1970-09-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-01T11:48:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-travancore-vs-elias-elias-ors-on-4-september-1970#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Bank Of Travancore vs Elias Elias & Ors on 4 September, 1970"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=113729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=113729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=113729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=113729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}