{"id":116827,"date":"1985-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1985-01-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985"},"modified":"2017-12-21T01:56:08","modified_gmt":"2017-12-20T20:26:08","slug":"bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","title":{"rendered":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1985 AIR 545, \t\t 1985 SCR (2) 784<\/div>\n
Author: Y Chandrachud<\/div>\n
Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nBANK OF BARODA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMOTI BHAI AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT29\/01\/1985\n\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1985 AIR  545\t\t  1985 SCR  (2) 784\n 1985 SCC  (1) 475\t  1985 SCALE  (1)181\n\n\nACT:\n      Bar  to  jurisdiction  of\t civil\tcourts\t-  Suit\t for\nrecovery of  a demand  loan sanctioned to agriculturist by a\nBank under  a promissory  note duly covered by hypothecating\nthe standing  crop of  his  lands  and\tsupported  with\t two\nguarantors for\tthe repayment of the loan-Maintainability of\nthe Suit-Rajasthan  Tenancy Act (Act 3 to 1955) sections 43,\n207 and 256 read with Entry 35 of Third Schedule, scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n      The  appellant Bank  filed a  suit for the recovery of\nthe amount of loan together with interest thereon granted to\nRespondent No. I who had not only executed a promissory note\nbut also a bond hypothecating the standing crop of his lands\nsituated at Khandu and Surjipada in Rajasthan. Respondents 2\nand 3  being guarantors\t for the  repayment of the loan were\nalso  proceeded\t against.  The\tTrial  Court  overruled\t the\npreliminary objection  raised by  the Respondents  as to the\nmaintainability of the Suit, in view of sections 207 and 256\nof the\tRajasthan Tenancy  Act, 1955.  But the\tHigh  Court,\nwhile allowing- the Civil Revision Application set aside the\njudgment of the Trial Court and dismissed the suit.\n      Hence the appeal by special leave of the Court.\n      Allowing the appeal, the Court.\n^\n      HELD:  1.1 A  combined reading of sections 207 and 256\nof the\tRajasthan Tenancy  Act, 1955  would  show  that\t the\njurisdiction of\t the civil  courts is barred only in respect\nof suits  and applications  of the  nature specified  in the\nThird Schedule\tto the\tAct  and  in  respect  of  suits  or\napplications based  on a cause of action in respect of which\nany  relief  could  be\tobtained  by  means  of\t a  suit  or\napplication of\tthe nature  specified in the Third Schedule.\nThe civil  court has  no jurisdiction to entertain a suit or\nproceeding with\t respect to any matter arising under the Act\nor the\tRules made thereunder, provided that a remedy by way\nof a suit, application or appeal or otherwise is provided in\nthe Act. the long title of which shows that it was passed in\norder  \"to  consolidate\"  and  amend  the  law\trelating  to\ntenancies of  agricultural lands  and to provide for certain\nmeasures of  land reforms  and matters\tconnected therewith.\n[787C-D; 788A]\n      1.2.  Entry 35 is described in the Third Schedule as a\n\"General\" entry,  that is  to  say,  not  relatable  to\t any\nparticular section of the Act. The\n785\nsuit filed  by the  Bank cannot fall under this \"General\" or\n\"residuary\"\tentry.\tA   loan  given\t by  a\tBank  to  an\nagriculturist, which  is  in  the  nature  of  a  commercial\ntransaction, is\t outside the  contemplation of\tthe Act\t and\ncannot be  said to be in respect of any matter arising under\nthe Act. [787G; 788A-B]\n      1.3.  The business  of the  Bank, in so far as lending\ntransactions  are  concerned,  is  not\tto  lend  moneys  on\nmortgages but  the business  is\t to  lend  moneys.  In\tthis\nparticular case,  the Bank  lent a  certain sum\t of money to\nrespondent 1  in the usual course of its commercial business\nand nothing  could be further removed from the contemplation\nof the\tAct than  such a transaction. It is only by way of a\ncollateral security  that the  Bank obtained a hypothecation\nbond and  a deed  of mortgage from respondent 1 and a letter\nof guarantee  from respondents\t2 and 3. The assumption that\nthe mortgage  has executed in pursuance of section 43 of the\nAct and, therefore, residuary Entry 35 of the Third Schedule\nis attracted, is not correct. [788G-H; 789A]\n      2.  On the  question of  jurisdiction, one must always\nhave regard  to the  substance of  the matter and not to the\nform of\t the suit. Approaching the matter from that point of\nview, primarily\t and basically the suit filed by the Bank is\none for\t recovering the\t amount which  is due to it from the\nrespondents on\tthe basis of the promissory note executed by\nrespondent No.\tI and  the guarantee  given by respondents 2\nand 3.\tThe reliefs  sought for\t also make it clear that the\nsuit is\t not one  to enforce the mortgage and, even assuming\nthat it\t is, the  mortgage not\thaving been  executed  under\nsection 43  of the  Act, nor  being one\t relatable  to\tthat\nsection, the  residuary Entry 35 can have no application. If\nthat entry is out of way, there is no other provision in the\nAct which would apply to the instant suit and therefore, the\ncivil court  has jurisdiction to entertain the suit filed by\nthe appellant Bank. [789C-E]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1321 of
\n1980.\n<\/p>\n
      From  the Judgment  and Order dated the 15th February,
\n1976 of\t the High  Court of  Rajasthan at  Jodhpur in  S. B.
\nCivil Revision No. 320 of 1978.\n<\/p>\n
       P.  G.  Gokhale\tand  Mr.  B.  R.  Agarwala  for\t the
\nAppellant.\n<\/p>\n
      Dalveer Bhandari for the Respondents.\n<\/p>\n
      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n      CHANDRACHUD,  C.J. The  appellant, the Bank of Baroda,
\nagreed through its Banswara Branch to sanction a demand loan
\nfacility in  the sum of Rs.36,000 in favour of respondent l.
\nIn consideration  thereof, respondent  I executed  a  demand
\npromissory note\t in favour  of the Bank on June 18, 1973. He
\nalso executed  a bond hypothecating the standing Crop of his
\nlands situated at Khandu and
\n786<\/span>
\nSurjipada  in\tRajasthan  Respondents\t 2  and\t 3  are\t the
\nguarantors for\tthe repayment  of  the\tloan.  In  order  to
\nfurther secure\tthe repayment  of  the\tloan,  respondent  1
\nexecuted a  deed of  simple mortgage  in favour of the Bank,
\nill respect of the lands at Khandu and Surjipada.\n<\/p>\n
      The  respondents having  failed to repay the loan, the
\nappellant filed\t against them  a suit  in the  court of\t the
\nlearned District  Judge, Banswara,  for recovering  a sum of
\nRs. 52,000  and odd which was due ` on the loan transaction.
\nRespondents  raised   a\t  preliminary\tobjection   to\t the
\nmaintainability of  the suit on the ground that the claim in
\nthe suit  was essentially  one for  enforcing  the  mortgage
\nexecuted by  them in  favour of the Bank and, therefore, the
\nRevenue court  had the\texclusive jurisdiction\tto entertain
\nthe suit,  by reason  of the  provisions  contained  in\t the
\nRajasthan Tenancy  Act 3  of 1955,  (hereinafter called “the
\nAct”). That  objection was overruled by the learned District
\nJudge but,  in a  civil revision  application filed  by\t the
\nrespondents, the High Court upheld it. According to the High
\nCourt, “the  execution of the mortgage deed by defendant No.
\nl in  favour of\t the plaintiff\tin respect  of\this  tenancy
\nrights in agricultural land also forms the essential part of
\nthe cause  of action  of the plaintiff and as such, the suit
\nis triable by a revenue court”. The correctness of this view
\nis questioned  by the  plaintiff in  this appeal  by special
\nleave.\n<\/p>\n
      Section 207 of the Act reads thus;\n<\/p>\n
\t   207.\t Suit and applications cognizable by revenue
\n     court only.-(1)  All  suits  and  applications  of\t the
\n     nature specified  in the  Third Schedule shall be heard
\n     and determined by a revenue court.\n<\/p>\n
\t   (2)\tNo court  other than  a revenue\t court shall
\n     take cognizance  of any  such suit or application or of
\n     any suit  or application  based on a cause of action in
\n     respect of\t which any relief could be obtained by means
\n     of any such suit or application.\n<\/p>\n
\t  Explanation:-If the  cause of\t action\t is  one  in
\n     respect of which relief might be granted by the revenue
\n     court, it\tis immaterial that the relief asked for from
\n     the civil\tcourt is  greater than, or additional to, or
\n     is not  identical with,  that which  the revenue  court
\n     could have granted.\n<\/p>\n
      Section  256 of  the Act,\t which is  complementary  to
\nsection 207, reads thus;\n<\/p>\n
787<\/span><\/p>\n
\t   “256.  Bar to  Jurisdiction of  civil courts.-(1)
\n     Save as  otherwise provided  specifically by  or  under
\n     this Act,\tno suit or proceeding shall lie in any civil
\n     court with respect to any matter arising under this Act
\n     or the Rules made thereunder, for which a remedy by way
\n     of suit,  application, appeal  or otherwise is provided
\n     therein.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t   (2)\tSave as\t aforesaid, no\torder passed  by the
\n     State Government  or by any revenue court or officer in
\n     exercise of  the powers  conferred by  this Act  or the
\n     Rules made there under shall be liable to be questioned
\n     in any civil court”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     A combined\t reading of  these two\tsections would\tshow
\nthat the  Jurisdiction of  civil courts\t is barred  only  in
\nrespect of suits and applications of the nature specified in
\nthe Third  Schedule to\tthe Act\t and in\t respect of suits or
\napplications based  on a cause of action in respect of which
\nany  relief  could  be\tobtained  by  means  of\t a  suit  or
\napplication of\tthe nature  specified in the Third Schedule.
\nThe civil  court has  no jurisdiction to entertain a suit or
\nproceeding with\t respect to any matter arising under the Act
\nor the\tRules made  thereunder provided that a remedy by way
\nof a suit, application or appeal or otherwise is provided in
\nthe Act.\n<\/p>\n
      The  legal position  on the  question of\tjurisdiction
\nwhich is  stated above\trequires examination  of the various
\nentries in the Third Schedule. That Schedule is divided into
\nthree parts,  the first\t of which  is  called  “Suits”,\t the
\nsecond is  called “Applications”,  and the  third is  called
\n“Appeals”. We  are concerned  in this  appeal  with  the  35
\nentries which are comprehended in the first part which deals
\nwith suits.  It is common ground, and the High Court has not
\nheld to the contrary, that none of the specific entries I to
\n34 is  applicable to  the suit\tfiled by the appellant Bank.
\nThe argument is that the residuary Entry 35 would govern the
\nsuit and,  therefore, by  reason of  sections 207 and 256 of
\nthe Act,  the Revenue  court alone could entertain it. Entry
\n35 is  described in the Third Schedule as a “General” entry,
\nthat is\t to say,  not relatable to any particular section of
\nthe Act.  The description of the entry as “General” is given
\nin Column  2 of\t the Third Schedule which is headed “Section
\nof Act.”  the third  column  of\t the  Schedule\tcarries\t the
\nheading “Description  of suit, application or appeal”. Under
\nthat column, the relevant description runs thus:\n<\/p>\n
      “Any other suit in respect of any matter arising under
\nthis Act,  not specifically  provided for  elsewhere in this
\nSchedule”.\n<\/p>\n
788<\/span><\/p>\n
       We are unable to appreciate how the suit filed by the
\nBank can  fall under  this “General” or residuary entry. The
\nsuit of\t the Bank  to recover  the loan is not in respect of
\nany matter  arising under the Act. The long title of the Act
\nshows that  it was passed in order “to consolidate and amend
\nthe law\t relating to tenancies of agricultural lands, and to
\nprovide for  certain measures  of land\treforms and  matters
\nconnected  therewith”.\t A  loan  given\t by  a\tBank  to  an
\nagriculturist, which  is  in  the  nature  of  a  commercial
\ntransaction, is\t outside the  contemplation, of\t the Act and
\ncan, by\t no  stretch of imagination be said to be in respect
\nof any matter arising under the Act.\n<\/p>\n
      The  High Court has relied on section 43 of the Act in
\norder to  come to  the conclusion  that the deed of mortgage
\nwas executed  by respondent  1 in  favour  of  the  Bank  in
\naccordance with\t that section  and, therefore,\tthe suit for
\nthe  sale   of\tthe  tenancy  rights  of  the  mortgagee  by
\nenforcement of the mortgage is a suit in respect of a matter
\narising under the Act. The High Court holds that such a suit
\nwould attract  the residuary entry since the matter to which
\nit relates  has not been specifically provided for elsewhere
\nin the Third Schedule. With respect, we are unable to accept
\nthis line  of reasoning. Section 43 (1) of the Act, which is
\nrelevant for this purpose, reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
\t   “43.\t Mortgage:-(1) Khateder tenant, or, with the
\n     general or\t special permission  of the State Government
\n     or any officer authorised by it in this behalf, a Ghair
\n     Khatedar  tenant,\t may  hypothecate  or  mortgage\t his
\n     interest in  the whole  or part  of his holding for the
\n     purpose of\t obtaining loan from the State Government or
\n     a Land Development Bank as defined in the Rajasthan Co-
\n     operative Societies Act, 1965 (Act 13 of 1965) or a Co-
\n     operative Society registered or deemed to be registered
\n     as such under the said Act or any Scheduled Bank or any
\n     other institution\tnotified by  the State Government in
\n     that behalf”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The  High Court  is in error in saying that `it cannot
\nbe disputed’  that the mortgage was executed by respondent 1
\nin pursuance  of section 43. The business of the Bank, in so
\nfar as\tlending transactions  are concerned,  is not to lend
\nmoneys on  mortgages but  the business is to lend moneys. In
\nthis particular\t case, the  Bank lent a certain sum of money
\nto respondent  1 in  the  usual\t course\t of  its  commercial
\nbusiness and  nothing could  be\t further  removed  from\t the
\ncontemplation of the Act than such a transaction. It is only
\nby way\tof a  collateral security  that the  Bank obtained a
\nhypothecation bond and
\n789<\/span>
\n     a deed  of mortgage  from respondent 1 find a letter of
\nguarantee from A respondents 2 and 3. The entire judgment of
\nthe High  Court is based on the assumption that the mortgage
\nwas executed  in pursuance  of section\t43 of  the Act\tand,
\ntherefore, residuary  Entry 35\tof  the\t Third\tSchedule  is
\nattracted. Once it is appreciated that the mortgage executed
\nby respondent  I is  outside  the  scope  of  the  Act,\t the
\nreasoning of the High Court has to be rejected.\n<\/p>\n
      On  the question of jurisdiction, one must always have
\nregard to the substance of the matter and not to the form of
\nthe suit.  If the  matter is  approached from  that point of
\nview, it  would be  clear that\tprimarily and basically, the
\nsuit filed  by the  Bank is  one for  recovering the  amount
\nwhich is  due to it from the respondents on the basis of the
\npromissory note\t executed by  respondent 1 and the guarantee
\ngiven by  respondents 2 and 3. The relief sought by the Bank
\nis that\t the suit should be decreed for the repayment of the
\namount due  from the  respondents. By the second prayer, the
\nBank has  asked that “in case of non-payment of the decretal
\namount” the mortgaged property should be brought to sale and
\nif the\tproceeds of  that sale\tare not\t enough to  meet the
\ndecretal  liability,   the  other   movable  and   immovable
\nproperties of  the respondents\tshould be  put at  sale. The
\nsuit is\t not one  to enforce the mortgage and, even assuming
\nfor the\t purpose of  argument that  it is,  the mortgage not
\nhaving been  executed under Section 43 of the Act, nor being
\none relatable  to `that\t section, the residuary Entry 35 can
\nhave no\t application. If  that entry is out of way, there is
\nno other  provision in\tthe Act,  which would  apply to\t the
\ninstant suit. The civil court has therefore, jurisdiction to
\nentertain the suit filed by the appellant Bank.\n<\/p>\n
      For  these reasons,  we set  aside the judgment of the
\nHigh Court  and restore that of the District Court. The suit
\nshall be  disposed of  expeditiously. The  appellant will be
\nentitled to its costs of this appeal from the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
S. R.\t\t\t\t\t     Appeal allowed.\n790<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 Equivalent citations: 1985 AIR 545, 1985 SCR (2) 784 Author: Y Chandrachud Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj) PETITIONER: BANK OF BARODA Vs. RESPONDENT: MOTI BHAI AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT29\/01\/1985 BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) ERADI, V. […]<\/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-116827","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nBank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - 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\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\" \/>\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=\"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-20T20:26:08+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985\",\"datePublished\":\"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-20T20:26:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\"},\"wordCount\":1774,\"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\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\",\"name\":\"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-20T20:26:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985\"}]},{\"@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":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - 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\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-20T20:26:08+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985","datePublished":"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-20T20:26:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985"},"wordCount":1774,"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\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985","name":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1985-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-20T20:26:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bank-of-baroda-vs-moti-bhai-and-ors-on-29-january-1985#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bank Of Baroda vs Moti Bhai And Ors on 29 January, 1985"}]},{"@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\/116827","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=116827"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116827\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116827"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=116827"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=116827"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}