{"id":189180,"date":"2009-12-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009"},"modified":"2014-01-12T12:21:57","modified_gmt":"2014-01-12T06:51:57","slug":"g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: N.Kumar And C.R.Kumaraswamy<\/div>\n
M1-\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nIDATED THIS THE 7\"\" DAY OF IDECECMBFCR. 2009\n\nPRESENT\nTHE I\"iON'BLE3 MR.\u00ab-JUSTICE N.KUM.AR\n\nAND\n\nTHE HONBLE2 MRJUSTICE C.ra.KuMARAS.--ii2\\}'A;$\/i\ufb01ff'   \n\nREGULAR FIRST APPEAL Ns;3.1.ioif.\u00e9d4O'i'7; \u00bb'   \n\nBETVVEEN :\n\nSri. G Shyama Bhat.\n\nS\/0 Ishwara Bhai.\n\nMajor  \nNow residing at Man.r'ia..If1ga\u00abiVa \" \nPanaje, Puituri * .' _   AA \nD.K. district.      Aiapeiiant.\n\n(I-3y Sri. K M  V\n\n1 Karr1.\u00e91i.rak.a V'.y2ir1J\u00e91s.;i'ya Va rizhaka\nS\u00e9lllgh\u00e9li L3\u00e9.d:.\"Arisa1'i Road\n\n\u00bb~'Bi11i'de1'._ M'ziz'1_g_&1lv()1*c?-- 1.\n\n' V.V\"'.R\u20acEphi'\u20ac\u00a7\u20acI1tCfd by its Manager\n\n .SI'i,. 'B'\u00abS ''I\"3__an.sari\n\n\"  S','_Q\"=a\\_\/\u00e9: r1\"k,a:.iran1ana Bhat\n\n- '-ReSi'cl'i'ng[:=at Mangaiore\n,._D.i{,.c.i'ifs'iri(:t..\n\n Sri_. 3~I~{ Govinda Rao\n\nAA ;,_S\/0\"' Ramappayya\n Major\n\" Residing at Field Street\n\nM&1IlgEiiO1'\u20ac*}. k\/\/\n\n\n\n3 Sri. P B Anduiitrh\nS\/0 Araby\nMerehaiit. Major\nResiding at KLikkuj::1dka\nSullia Taiuk. Kukktijadka\nD.i{. disirict..  Respondents<\/pre>\n
(Sri. M.C. Ravi Kumari Advocate
\nFor Ravi and Ravi, Advocates for 1’esp0ndeh’i.\u00bbNrj’;._1.}..
\nisms RFA M;fHed under_scpuon”9s oi cps ”
\nagainst the Judgment and Decree datieci-:’2.3.’1_.2001
\npassed in O.S.N0. 86\/83 by the 13$”e.A;Vddii.ti’01’ialV’ <\/p>\n
Judge, (Sr.Dn.] and CJM, Maiigaioife. dee_’ife’evir’1g’=.the V’
\nsuit [er recovery of money’._     <\/p>\n
This appeal coming 0nd\u00bbVV”!](:)1′,_heai’indg’ this day,
\nN.Kumar J., d\u20ac1iV\u20acI’\u20acv(–3i.jVjh\u20ac’fb’ii’O.)}$’i}Tg.I*  <\/p>\n
JIiDkLMEyNTjf,<\/p>\n
Th_1__s…. Ci’:\u20ac*ii’eii”c!.ei’nt’s””‘a’i)pea1 against the
\njudgmefzi and _de:,c’?r.e”e.._.tis\u00a3T,_the Trial Court which has<\/p>\n
decreed thegsuit’0_f”i:.he~…’}5iainiiii as prayed for.<\/p>\n
‘  “\u00ab.F”0ii”~.ti’ie purficise 01’ eoiiveiiieiice. the parties<\/p>\n
are_d_i’Veefe:i’\u00bb\u00a7e’d.\\ aid. their ranks as referred to in the<\/p>\n
ongmaisgei<\/p>\n
‘V3. ‘The,Vpiair1tiff is a joint stock Company<\/p>\n
 :ie~I1e0i<p0i'Vat'ed under the Indian Companies Act. It<\/p>\n
X\/d<\/p>\n
-3-<\/span><\/p>\n
is carrying on the business oi’ Commission Agency
\nin agricuitural produce such as arecanuts.
\ncoconuts. plaintins, banana. pepper. cardamom
\nand forest produce.\n<\/p>\n
The first defendant was
\nManaging Director as per resoiutiori
\n15.09.19″75. He continued ivthxe
\nDirector unit} he resign\u00bbed
\nGenerai Administration of
\nin him. subject to.’:t’h\u00ab_e  theVV”BAo’ard of
\nDirectors in Rates and<\/p>\n
Regu1ations.”i:_ie’– had the  grant loans<\/p>\n
upto Rt3A_1300\/;i’fwithj”Qr””–u?ithout. security. Without<\/p>\n
the express'”peei9’ini’s.s1″o\u00abri=of the Board of Directors.<\/p>\n
 the  had to powers to grant<\/p>\n
ioagas, _Vo.r–_t*o give credit for sums exceeding<\/p>\n
‘~d.3’i*lx.e had no powers to mortgage or<\/p>\n
V.hypo’the–..catve’; the properties or assets of the<\/p>\n
.coAn1ipan’y. without express permission of the Board<\/p>\n
ite._of_VV”Di’rectot*s. The Board of Directors of the<\/p>\n
“p-iaintiff” usualiy meet oiice in a month. During<\/p>\n
\\\/<\/p>\n
-4-<\/span><\/p>\n
such meetings at} decisions regarding granting of
\nloans or advances or providing credit faciiities
\nwould be taken. The Managing Director was
\nexpected to placebefore the Board of Directorsaii
\nthe papers for their consideration. The B::)a’rfc_”ip:<.V:of'
\nDirectors with the advice and  V'
\ndefendant. the Managing Dir.cc~:t\u00bbo'rp
\nsecond defendant. who is
\nwould take decisions. V t V t M
\nThe second defendaI1t:o.i.s:.tvhe'-,Chiei"\ufb01ccpoitintant<\/p>\n
of the company.  down in an<\/p>\n
order dated 1.8_;'O\u00a7'\u00abL   Directors.<\/p>\n
His duhvtpies and':':'..r4es,pVo.risibilities as per the said<\/p>\n
I'\u20acSO1L1?LiO1'Vi".._"'()f ".B_.oard of Directors were.<\/p>\n
..V.inte1ra31iat'.* to"':31ai1it,airi correct and up-to–date<\/p>\n
AXacc\u00aboants;_*,p'i'.epare and submit, quarterly tria}<\/p>\n
b"a1a.n_ce"tog._th,e"V.Board. to prepare and submit fina}<\/p>\n
_ bata'.t1ce"—V:'G.h'e'ets to the Board, to watch the working<\/p>\n
the Depots. to submit, reports to the Manager<\/p>\n
_'=_ar1_d"'i:he President regarding any irregtiiarities. to<\/p>\n
"hcheck all the slips prepared for each payment of<\/p>\n
-5″\n<\/p>\n
amounts after verifying the eorre(:i.ness and
\nregularity of such proposed payments. to submit
\nregular siaiuiory reiurne. to make payment of
\nvarious taxes and fees etc. And he should sub..ini\u00a3
\nto the Board all the consignors debit.
\nwhich are more than one year old  M<\/p>\n
carry out all the resolutions voi””i;-he l3oav.rjd’:’arid–f!.1e’-.&<\/p>\n
must report the action iaken s.ho.Tu}d’i<\/p>\n
distribute work among ih_e~.__s1ai”i” _ arid s}”i;1f)”eir\\rise
\ntheir Work. In short. his. :A'(:lv1,_1’Ii),{ wa\u00e9; ~I,o Hg\u00e9ee all
\nfiriancial transactioris~’jb.e’ir1\u00a7\u00a7V}carii.ed._ or: properly<\/p>\n
and in aCco1’da:2–ee wj’i’h’\u00bb–i.aw”ai1d 1″.eso’.Eutions of the<\/p>\n
Board  to report about any
\nirregulaivtie–s  or {he Board.\n<\/p>\n
‘l”he_ l3o.a1.’.vCi”o’i1′ [5i1’ewc1,ors of the plaintiff during<\/p>\n
1-l l}-1e 1982 were agrieuliurisis<\/p>\n
2′::_.3\u00e9Eod.iVng:’=i_An” Villjages. who had no knowledge about<\/p>\n
marketing_o.rAladminis1′.ration of the company. The<\/p>\n
ill.’-‘\u00ab._’Vi7.i1’St d’eVi_fendant is a law graduate and holds a<\/p>\n
 v.’C’_O’fI’lf’f1A’\u20ac1’C(‘3 Degree and is liaving expert. knowledge<\/p>\n
 practical skill in marketing and<\/p>\n
-6-<\/span><\/p>\n
admiriist.rat’ior1 of the (‘.OI}’1;)’c11’}_V. The Board of
\nDirectors had piaeed absolute faith and trust in
\nhim. The second defendant who has served in the
\nAccounts Department for several years <\/p>\n
trusted officer of the plaintiff. Compariy. __’1″he-\u00abtie-i:o’ire_4_’*_<\/p>\n
the Board of Directors had no 1’easor.–.t:.ogsu:sp_eet'” ‘<\/p>\n
the Conduct and activities of the <\/p>\n
2: 0 fl<\/p>\n
2. After the resigriatiori
\n03.03.1982 the Board or D’iv’r’e:.et.()_r-S  alppraise
\nthemselves of the   by
\nclosely examining  of the
\ncompany.  f.:f\u00a7f1(3jJi{r10\\Af several
\nunsavozvtiirti :ovi’\u00abVV.:’_’theihdadihiiiistration of the
\neompar1zyvVVat  defendants 1 and 2<\/p>\n
Co1luSI’Qn  of the defendants. The<\/p>\n
 aiid'”2″;”Vthe Managing Director and the<\/p>\n
\u00b0~_’:h’ie.i’\u00a5.}3s;\u00ab<;eoi;.i1i'ai1t. respecftiveiy. had Conducted<\/p>\n
themse1v_es7L_iri such a manner that there was<\/p>\n
 appare~~nti;_y no room for suspicion. and the Board<\/p>\n
_Di'i'=\u00abeetors concerned themselves with the papers<\/p>\n
V___""pei;taining to the admiriistration placed before<\/p>\n
u",i.hem. The Board of Directors were therefore<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
 I07 lend<\/p>\n
c7'r<\/p>\n
shocked to find defendariis l and 2. misusing the
\ntrust. and confidence reposed on them have had a<\/p>\n
deep laid plan for rnaking illegal gain against\u00bb-__t_he<\/p>\n
interest. of the plaint.il'f company. The
\n1 and 2 colluded together and acE'ed-:4':iilleg.\u00e9\u00a7'lEy1V_""e V'
\nunlawfully and contrary to  <\/p>\n
and the Memorandum and Ar1"iycle__s"'loI'l'As's;.ociav\u20ac;":'o_n~l_y<\/p>\n
of the Plaintiff Company. V\u00bb .\n<\/p>\n
On 27.06. 1980  1’\u00e9’1%’\u00a7’t_f djefelndantHlpnrported
\nto have advanced to the :_t.hlii’rd:  a sum of<\/p>\n
Way Bill<\/p>\n
Rs.94\u00bb,600\/~ o’_w51’~th;:_ \u00a7b\u00e9rsi-s ”
\nl\\lo.78398   was purported
\nto haye  21 Transport Agency<\/p>\n
M\/S.S.A.S”.,__alnVdVx:3_o4ns; yTS_.ull1a. On verification of all<\/p>\n
___.1,he yreqleve1nt’  registers it is found that
\n as noted in the said way bill<\/p>\n
 by the plainiiff company. ll. is
\nl _qui’Le– clveizilrvldillronl the records that the defendants 1,
\n .an_.d u3″*’have colluded among ixhemselves and have<\/p>\n
_\ufb02_b”r_o’ug’ht about among t.l1en1selves certain records<\/p>\n
colour of credibility to the said<\/p>\n
l\/<\/p>\n
\/,<\/p>\n
_8-\n<\/p>\n
transaction. The first defendant appears to have
\ntaken a typed let.ter from the third defendant.
\nwherein a request. was made for advance to him a
\nsum 01′ Rs.9-4._600\/wagainst the security of-“ul_\u00bbOO
\nbags of arecanuts alleged to have been
\nby him as per the aforesaid Way
\nfrom Kukkujadka. The first
\nappears to have obtained;l’:’.Va’n_l
\nPromissory Note dated  the
\nthird defendant and zone lVAb.ral’ti.in*i.._Ku.n’ch.iA,  per
\nthe prevailing  practice of<\/p>\n
such a huge loarreou-l’d'”n:oi hA.\u00a7t*’54″\u20ac  given by the<\/p>\n
first deg’hten’danf.i the sanction of the Board
\nof Directors.  amount could be<\/p>\n
disbursed   ‘tAh\u20acV’Tl3OUnd\u20aci1 duty of both t.he<\/p>\n
xi’d.ei’e”ttria:r1\u00abts’vi.A.1  to check up and satisfy<\/p>\n
 the goods noted in the way bill<\/p>\n
hadylhheenyliteceived by the company. And it is the<\/p>\n
 __4’u_.sual pra_ctic:e to note in the Debit Slip the actual<\/p>\n
 oi’ the goods standing to the credit of the<\/p>\n
‘V”=.___””.’pei:son who took the loan. The receipt of all the<\/p>\n
“consignments are always recorded in a specific<\/p>\n
E\/M<\/p>\n
register. And there is a register kept at the
\ngodown of the Company known as Inward
\nWeighmem Register. And in the office there is
\nanother inward Weighmenl. Register I’1″1E1i1’11,vEV).\u00a7’,!I’:.1r\u20ac,(.L1.
\nin both the Inward Weighment
\nreceipt. of all consignments are
\nparticuiar consignment of IOQJ'”o1′
\non the security of which a\u00bb.s.t1n1A:4o.fd:’Re.9\u00e9i.iV\u00a33d’O,\/L
\nadvanced was not written  V.  oi”\n<\/p>\n
Rs.94,600\/~ to the t.h”i~r_d  edx\/divdenjced by
\nthe Debit Slip No.2dVd’ett:eVd’i”‘ and the<\/p>\n
ledger entry _..o.i7.c:Vt’_’he   ” Pfijjart from the<\/p>\n
above  fudrdther and subsequent
\nadvances  defendant to the third<\/p>\n
defeiidaiit or; v_VE1’:’Vi.f()Ll.E~’J: dtttes without the sanction of<\/p>\n
did”-the   1)1\u00a7?e'<:':'o'i~ and finally as on 31.07.1982<\/p>\n
 found due from the third<\/p>\n
deienddantddyrdyets Rs.1.23.225\/~. The above said<\/p>\n
H,,__,4itrarlsactdions were kept out of the knowiedge of the<\/p>\n
"\u00a7o.ard=_.of Directors and indeed were never brought<\/p>\n
V"=._,.j""'toV'[;the notice of the Board of Directors in their<\/p>\n
'Wmeeting. There was no occasion for the Board of<\/p>\n
\\i\/<\/p>\n
 the defendants 4 and 5 appear<\/p>\n
-10-<\/span><\/p>\n
Directors to know these transactions and the first<\/p>\n
defendant. under the rules Could not have<\/p>\n
sanctioned the above loans. The second defendant<\/p>\n
who is a responsible officer in the pIaiy’h—-t;iff<\/p>\n
company ought to have brought this n1atte.r_ll*!.o’thle-\u00abV
\nnotice of the Board of Directors of the’helloiripanlyiii
\nHe has kept quiet and he has””le’o<1.ltided\u00ab <\/p>\n
defendants 1 and 2 in their <\/p>\n
his own monetary lC)\u20acI'1\u20ac\u00a7'i'{.,S.:"v.' Unvder._ "the-.yla'blove<\/p>\n
circumstances, the said a\ufb01'10'Vll'nVV{"._.iS liable7 to be<\/p>\n
recovered from the  _ll;vll.2VLl'a11d 3. They<\/p>\n
are jointly an;i:l  l'tCl.l'pay the said<\/p>\n
anioumjlll of  inierest thereon at
\n20% froin*  realisation. The<\/p>\n
defeI'l,4(M$.r1t.sll"3._:VEiiid "2  committed fraud and<\/p>\n
llllbreqiclh pf rt-r.List"ori""t.lhe plaintiff company and they<\/p>\n
'are_.peirs"oanalllVyliiiable to pay the said amounts. As<\/p>\n
 the amount: due on the above<\/p>\n
f"~.\u00ab.4_l'a,ccou1itis Rs. 1 ,41,708.75.<\/p>\n
if  'The defendants i and 2 acting in Collusion<\/p>\n
to have<\/p>\n
\\\\\/<\/p>\n
.\/<\/p>\n
wig"\n<\/p>\n
nefarious dealings of the first defendant; Both the
\ndefendants 1 and 2 along with 4 and 5 are
\npersonally liable to nialie good this amount. As on
\n16.10.1992, the amounts found Clue l’rorV1V.1’f,:Mtf’li1.Ve
\ndefendants 4 and 5 was Rs.l9.353.50
\nthereon at. 20% pa. from that
\n31.03.1983 the amount due .3
\nRs.2l,l27.25. 3 3 3 3 3 3<\/p>\n
The defendants l andffiljfas  Director
\nand Chief ACcoL1nta’ni.__  gflziintillilffflCompany
\nought to have taken all-   safeguard<\/p>\n
the inaferesZ1″s.l[_.. offQV1h’e’=._’ company to realise ihe<\/p>\n
\u00a3:111}OLif}l’fS.’.t”,flLlVt’.. ‘:.’o~.V”ii:fa’-,fi;_:>111 its Consignors or<\/p>\n
ouston_1ers.”-. ffB,l.V1l~, Ad_ufe” to their negligence and<\/p>\n
V careleissness they have not taken necessary steps<\/p>\n
 fo:Vr’eooE\\}lerjz..,Qf anioiinis due to the plaintiff before<\/p>\n
‘ills f(:la’ini’l.,WaS’*– barred by lirniiaiion. A sum of<\/p>\n
 due from one B.lbrahim of Bapel<\/p>\n
–VKu:1chi”\u00a7-T’&er{:1a1a Post. Kerala. The Claim against<\/p>\n
u’~–hfim_for”ihe said amount was barred by limitation<\/p>\n
l\\\/<\/p>\n
V13″\n<\/p>\n
on O9,01.t982. There was another sum of
\nRs.5.113.T\/”5 due from one Kasturi Nayak. wife of
\nShantharama. Nayak of Nettanige Mudnur Village.
\nKavu Post. Puttur Taluk. The Claim
\namount. was barred by limitation on
\nThe defendants 1 and 2 otxghtado  <\/p>\n
appropriate legal action againgst.  SaatdV”pe’rVson:.:vaA<\/p>\n
before the claims were ttmte’\u00ab.barr–ed’.’ Aft1ay’e_:n0Vt <\/p>\n
done so and the plaintiff ctonipany is.’\u00a7,~gt: to toss on
\naccount of their :’1.eg1ig_et1.j_ce.””\u00bb._’pa_:*1’hereI’ore, the
\ndefendants 1 and  V1tai3_Ie..7_to”fp\ufb02ay the said
\namount with,  ozi _t.hjeV”  at 20% per
\nan11um:”–.t’r’orI1′  due dates. But the<\/p>\n
plaintiff ‘cornpany7._ota.i’I11s interest. on the said<\/p>\n
–‘v.p_amc}”Ufl!f1t.:__f’E’1’on1AAG~4;.r___.}__’1v.1982 the date of 1’egts1’e1*ed<\/p>\n
.”..A11e.t’i”r;:Vep.’v__ASj.o’1’1.._31.03.1983 the amount. due on the<\/p>\n
a13.”o\\?L5  is Rs.’7.256\/~.\n<\/p>\n
 Tdhe; defendants 1 and 2 ought to have<\/p>\n
“‘p.dc.b’t.–at_Aned licence under the provisions of the<\/p>\n
 .._K_arnataka Money Lenders Act. as the plaintiff<\/p>\n
ki\/.\n<\/p>\n
W14,<\/p>\n
company was advancing the loans to its
\nConsignors. The above t.ransaet.ions amounted to<\/p>\n
the business of lending monev Though the Said<\/p>\n
Act had Come into force in 1976 the dei’endan”t–s 1
\nand 2 did not apply for and take the 3<\/p>\n
licence under the provisions 01′ the said <\/p>\n
did not possess money 1er1de1*s”Iioe’nc:e<. Tii.e"re_fodr"e' a7<\/p>\n
suit in o.s. No.e54\/1980 on 1.h'e.. file of LilfiefM'u\ufb01:.gi'~if"*–..<\/p>\n
Court, Mangalore again'si\u00ab1r't.one'._S'i=i..}Gu1vndVVappa
\nGowda was disniissedday  The evlaim in
\nthe said suit was for Rs~,4.7'7\u00bbT3.5'3ViV.xtt1'thiinterest and<\/p>\n
court: c.o"s't:…_V'7':h\u00e9j:::f:\u00a7"ot.a\u00abE\u00bb'*1.oss""eaused to the Dlaintiff
\nConipany on 'a_ot:~:o:,initV'Vo._{"'t,_he dismissal of the said<\/p>\n
suit wasi"Rs;v5;2'5$3.%8..;': And this amount was<\/p>\n
"'~,fK\u00a7ee;fV'er?1.3,5l'?. fron'1~–….1..}1e defendants 1 and 2 with<\/p>\n
'=.inte"r'estv.._t'tt',hereon at 20% per annum from<\/p>\n
 date of dismissal of the said suit.\n<\/p>\n
 on ~3d1′;03.I983 the amount due on that account<\/p>\n
  “is .R\u00a7’;~\u00ab_s,3 12\/–.\n<\/p>\n
_1L_<\/p>\n
The plaintiff eompany got issued a Iegai
\nnotice on 04.11.1982 to the defendants and also to
\none Sri.K.I'”I.Mohammed to whom aiso
\ndefendants 1 and 2 appear to have made
\nof large sums of money in the san1.e;”  V’
\nwithout the sanction of the :.E3’c)a.rd
\nThe defendants 1 and 2 1.0   <\/p>\n
would appear to have a1rea_d’y_ insV’ti.iu’!.ed.: in<\/p>\n
o.s_ No.41\/1981 on,—ihe ,Fi’ie”L_”oI”-\u00bb_ihe “cvmi Judge
\nCourt, Puiiur agaiI1St4’h#i.f’l’i.”:_I3i\u00a7’f\u20aci1’dElViiiS 1. 2. 4 and
\n5 have sent V firiiiioloieiidsivb’r’ep.ii”e:s,_ to ‘ytvvhe registered
\nnotice s   bu};\/::fi.:1″h e’– —  iI1’fi”{“‘f–. ‘ <\/p>\n
The “e_oia1I1\u00a7ofn,h  for the claims made<\/p>\n
against ilie\ufb01defelida–t1’t’s”Vl1ei’eir1 is fraud. breach of<\/p>\n
K’1sFUSv.t’..”‘:~(T.;O_11I.l._SiOI1’Hgi’~\u00a3EVVCf riegiigenee and carelessness<\/p>\n
 duties oi’ the C1\u20ac’.f’\u20ac31′}daI11,S 1 and 2<\/p>\n
andVoihei*d.efendanis. AI} the above ti-arisaetions<\/p>\n
  are closely knit. together and prearrangement and<\/p>\n
“\u00a3.i:eVrefore the cause of action is common.<\/p>\n
“=..__””Therei’ore. a common suit is fiied. Therefore. they<\/p>\n
kl\/A.\n<\/p>\n
“r16”\n<\/p>\n
sought for 21 decree for money in .21 sum of
\nRs.1T\/6.504\/–. Subsequently, plaint was amended<\/p>\n
and the claim was reduced to Rs.1.4l,7’08.75.<\/p>\n
4. After service of summons. the
\nentered appearance and filed a
\nstatement. contesting the
\nadmits that the he was
\nthe piainiiff company for  7  has
\nworked and disChaf:g~e_d   law.\n<\/p>\n
provisions of the  of<\/p>\n
Association  }:3_l21\u00a7in:tlil”f.’if-lo’n.1Vp_s;i1y and to the<\/p>\n
sat,isfa?r;tioinllllofy  of Directiors, honestly,<\/p>\n
c1i1igemi’y…_ “peas.\u00a2ri;;:ni’y.._:’:”aiid bonafide. keeping in<\/p>\n
View the belstAi1″1terestls of the Company. All his<\/p>\n
la’cit_s’i”\\iize?i*e either Vsl\u00e9ihcrticwiied and\/or ratified by the<\/p>\n
l\ufb02olarcli’ Ihiring the said period, the<\/p>\n
com-pany Dhas shown great progress and<\/p>\n
 “<\u00ab_!'LI1'1}1)I'O\\.f.E':Hl'"AI;:I\u20ac1'1'L. as is known to and adiliitted by all<\/p>\n
 "'CQ'n_ee::ned. The accounts were auclitecl and the<\/p>\n
'lit–..\ufb02Ba?1ance Sheet was prepared regularly and as per<\/p>\n
-17-<\/span><\/p>\n
law. and all mat.t.e1*s were approved and accepted<\/p>\n
by the General Body.\n<\/p>\n
‘The allegation in the plaint. that the
\nManaging Director had the power of g1’a11ti11gvVl’o:a\u00bb1is
\nonly upto Rs. \u00a3.OOO\/- and that without
\npermission of the Board of Di1*ectors_..V__hle::.
\npower to grant loans or to <\/p>\n
exceeding Rs. 1.000\/~ was deiiieii. <\/p>\n
The appointment oi’  Nlainahgiiig D}ii*ecto1*
\ndoes not disclose Vt.’hf\u00e9”_s’aici_v.lre..s;’t.ir.’ietions. The<\/p>\n
defendant reco.1lects_…si_lI’a.t’._Al”oi”‘ll”‘so’iiie”. years the<\/p>\n
authoiity   Director for the
\nsanct.ionuoi’–loans’:_was~.__ti~\u00bbi1limited as per guidelines.<\/p>\n
At any_  Valvl_i.he. trllansac\u00e9tions including loans<\/p>\n
 place during the time the<\/p>\n
‘r:leifeTnd..ai1_tfi,”w_a”s functioning as the Managing<\/p>\n
Direyctor  with the authority. sanction or<\/p>\n
“I’_’E1[ifiCK:”!l;lAf’_:_’1’l of the Board of Directors. The Board<\/p>\n
‘~o”fVVD\u00bbirectors are not entitled to escape the<\/p>\n
“”‘responsibilit’y for their actions and omissions. if<\/p>\n
u\ufb02any and are not entitled to point at others for the<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
i;gW<\/p>\n
the piaiiitiff is $E,i})pI’\u20acSSiI’1g documents iake at the
\nproper time. He suspects the genuineness of the
\ndocuments shown to the defendant. as the
\npromissory note executed by the 3″‘ C1(3f'(3I1(?1.’:v’1V1″.’.i:””>’.).I’i
\n27.6.1980. The suggestion in the
\nwas granted on 27.6.1980 to the
\nwithout sanction of the
\ncorrect. The defendant does
\ngranted any Cash loan  3″;  a<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.94,60O\/–y”~o_I1  i5i;i’rt’her the<\/p>\n
advances referred to inthe5p1_.ai’–n_’\u00e9V.v”said to have<\/p>\n
been made  3!}? C’3(f,rI3f311.{i”‘c’1’i’:i~~1j.uCf\u00e9”Va1’iOuS dates<\/p>\n
wiihouzi thee{svaheiiio_n’\u00ab..o’_of  Board of Directors
\netc… is allegation that those<\/p>\n
U’aI1S;’–1C1;iOI1RS kepdfs away E’:-oni the Board of<\/p>\n
V.”DiI’e’.(‘,if0iI_”S “is fai’s'”e”‘;”V The aliegaiions that a sum of<\/p>\n
 due from the 3″‘ defendant is not<\/p>\n
eorreici._.”.r’\u00a5._EiiV’a1iy rate. the 1*’ defendant is not<\/p>\n
‘V1_iab1e*~t.voA’;.Lhe piairitiff any amount. due from the 3?”<\/p>\n
 for any of the reasons alleged in the<\/p>\n
“\u00b0p1Vaini.. 3″‘ defendant: P.B.Andunhi would transact<\/p>\n
Win other names also. This defendant reeoileets<\/p>\n
-20-<\/span><\/p>\n
that on 27.6.1980. the amounts were due to the
\nplaintiff from the 3″-3 defendant taking into
\naccount. aiso the liability in respect Ol’O’t1’l\u20aci’I”lE1’__I’I’1\u20acS
\ntransacted by them. adjustment entries
\non that date and documents are taken
\ndefendant. for the balance amo__u.nt__for”tlhef’_p.ti’r:p’oesecu
\nof security and conveniencei\ufb02\u00e9otfirecftJ\\le~ry,’:”a”ft’\u00a2e”;..:
\nreceiving some Cash fron\u00e9:_”i.,he
\nAnduhni. This was done   Sri
\nNarasimha Sastry   found it
\ndesirable in the. inteirest.  Company.
\nThe .:li\\{a\ufb01.lfVJ5iV”?il’n’ii”‘:breach of trust
\nare  are not furnished.\n<\/p>\n
‘I’h.erefodre._”  do not amount to a<\/p>\n
proper This defendant is not able<\/p>\n
.._to r..e\u00a7coli~ect the’ transactions with defendants 4<\/p>\n
‘a’f1dV.Vd”‘5,EV”ihVVeA~.’nature of the transaction and the<\/p>\n
~i1″ansactions. This defendant is not<\/p>\n
\u00abt_i_i.e’a’rnot1nts due from defendants 3 and 4<\/p>\n
to the p_lai.ntiff. The other t1’ansact.ions referred to<\/p>\n
 ~w__V’are also\u00e9ienied. At any rate. this defendant is not<\/p>\n
t.o pay the said amount. The defendant. is<\/p>\n
M  <\/p>\n
,2]-\n<\/p>\n
not in a position to say whether the license under
\nthe Money Lenders Act was required or not. The
\nplainiifl’–Cornpany had iawyers for giving the
\nadvices and if advice is not got on what dot?ti.nie:ni{_s
\nhave to be taken regarding the Money
\nthis defendant is not iiablem
\nHowever. he reeollects the .l
\nlicense were aiso being n’1a_de l”i*.o;ln1 time
\nHe do not recollect. urhalllvlvllhaiabened. tlielllsuit
\nmentioned in Pai*ag!’a_’pyh  lhe suit
\nis dismissed on  the<\/p>\n
resignation Qf4l.’lfie’  dei’e’:11d’aA.ni’.”.’uflfhe suit eiaim is<\/p>\n
barredzvlby i’ir:ili_i.at:i.o11_.’lV.The eiaim is also barred by
\nthe principles’ waiver. acquiescence.<\/p>\n
All theyEran’sac:t.io11s.that have taken place during<\/p>\n
\u00abgs  “” “i’Vlar1ag,.;ii’ig [Director has been<\/p>\n
l’s_aVi;et’ia.o:r1ed-_l”appropriate and ratified and are done<\/p>\n
with lproperiailluthoriiy as required.<\/p>\n
 “defendant. W Sri ii Govinda Rao also has<\/p>\n
l-_i’i”l_e’c.i~a separate siatemeiit. Some of the members<\/p>\n
it “o.f7ihe Board of Directors wanted to make wrongful<\/p>\n
lye<\/p>\n
Wggw<\/p>\n
gain of the funds of the Company which this
\ndefendant was opposing and so only to wreck
\nVengeance he was placed under suspension since
\n19.10.1982, an enquiry was ordered by i’ra.n’1–.ing
\ncharges and that made this defendanr
\nfrom the post in which he was \\x!o1’kingi_f\u20ac:
\nadditionai harassment, the pr’e’seni:&_
\nfried and this defendant was  <\/p>\n
This defendant joined the_VL4″”p_1;–1i11.Viifi”  11
\nVyavasaya Varihaka,’Sangiha…”L_Lifni.i,ed  cierk in
\nthe year 1956.   as Chief<\/p>\n
Accountant o_r1’1y  which<\/p>\n
appoin;\u00a3meni.Av(was7′;eoni’i.rmed in the next year. No
\nspecific7duties*werebg-iy’e.1J.=’to him. He was also not<\/p>\n
served witxirydaoytr_eso’1u.._i’iion passed by the Board of”<\/p>\n
_ Direcitovrs. Theyuappointment order only indicates<\/p>\n
  he .ew.a”s–._V responsible For keeping i,ipwto~date<\/p>\n
a-Ceo-11ni.s”~._aiid._.i:o act  per the direction of the<\/p>\n
Managinvg.ttijiirzector. Therefore. all aiiegations in<\/p>\n
fthe p1ai'”n.ci’. contrary to the said facts was denied.<\/p>\n
 .i}..8.4[:1970. when his duties were Iaid down in<\/p>\n
1′ ”~7.1.I”.1t3v._()1′:’-‘(l1(:,’I’._ he was not the ChiefA(‘couI11iant. The<\/p>\n
.5<\/p>\n
W24.”\n<\/p>\n
docunients which the plaintiff is relying on in the
\nplaint. He is not in a position to recognise as to
\nwhich were the doetimenis referred to in the
\nDlaint. He denies the iosses to the tune”–.yof
\nRs.94.600\/– as set–out in the plaint.
\nliable to pay the aforesaid aI}’iOL1I1lS.W
\nbeen no fraud as alleged niu(:h
\ntrust. To the best of
\ndefendant. accounts were
\nwere drawn. advanoesx ha.}.\u00bb”e” or by
\nratification by the  _.He has also<\/p>\n
denied the paiigavgraphs. It is<\/p>\n
not hisgdulvtly”t,5o,  license tinder the Money
\nLendersl’Act. if.thVe_fbd–e:e’i\u00abs~io11 has gone against the<\/p>\n
cornpany. it” is it’.o–i’ ‘i.he’:Con’ipany to challenge the<\/p>\n
lV’s.aid’-ijlucl—gnment. l’i’i”i’el defeiidant has not advanced<\/p>\n
‘a_n’y_”ino*ney”‘..fio~” anybody rnuch less the person<\/p>\n
nalmeld in.lblai’:;agra13h 7. The suit is bad for non-<\/p>\n
 joinder and mis–joinder of Cause of action. The<\/p>\n
‘~p’lailnt\u00abii’f’s eiairn is barred by principles of estoppel<\/p>\n
“”an\\;:l waiver. The suit is frivolous and therefore. he<\/p>\n
ll\ufb01sotlght for dismissal of the suit. <\/p>\n
-25″\n<\/p>\n
6. 3″” defendant’ also has tiied a detailed written
\nstatement. He has categorically admitted that he
\nhas been dealing with the plaintiE”f\/Conipany for
\nmany years past and has consigned &11’1’21C1{an~7t’:t’t’.7tO
\nthe plailqtiff on many occasions. It is
\non 27.6.1980 this defendant
\nof Rs.9-4600\/~ from the ptadi\u00bbitt’i’1’E7
\nwaybtil 11078398. It is
\neottuded with     of
\nthem. The avern’ie;31_s ma’deivi_:’:t.ti’a_t. t.h\u00abe’1*’e i”‘\\V2\u00a7\\\/as no
\nconsigning of areka   defendant<\/p>\n
is not aware a:-:-_te\u00bb_ what’  o,r”iS–..i10iIrecorded in the<\/p>\n
i’egiste,i” 0f’th;’e_V 1)1?air1.t’i’tf&t’. it  not true that some
\nmore ad.va\u00abneeisVi’ittcttie-~._tVtCvbt;’ained by the defendant<\/p>\n
S1,1bSeq_Vt1e1it”tyV.V’ .ff;hiAs_ d”‘efendant decided to go and<\/p>\n
d_’0.:\\N}_1AiI1″B()”\ufb01ib\u20acly. Hence. on 5.7.1982. this<\/p>\n
‘_dpeV1’*s0na11y went to the office of the<\/p>\n
platintiit a’n’jdf:paid the entire amount. amounting to<\/p>\n
?igs.1_’2..3″‘;22’5.00 and the promote dated 27.6.1980<\/p>\n
f\u00a7’:1r1di”‘QAther eonneeted,doeuinents were returned to<\/p>\n
 1*” defendant had by then left” the<\/p>\n
7.:ntaiiitiff\/eonipany. This defendant. paid the<\/p>\n
-25..\n<\/p>\n
aforesaid amount. into the hands of A
\nGopalalwishna Bhat who was the manager
\nincharge of the plaintiff. The said A<\/p>\n
Gopalakrishna Bhat also said that he \\PVOL1l’Cl..VV’t?3.”(‘i’2>17\\.V_Ci<\/p>\n
a receipt for the amount. paid in a
\nOn 9.7.1982, this defendant w-rote a_.le\u00bbt.,t’:e~1″V”t..o \u00ab.t.l’1e’u  4
\nsaid Manager incharge requesting…l11rtt\u00ab._t”:o_’<\/p>\n
receipt. by registered post; Thei:\u00a2”was  to <\/p>\n
that letter. He did not pttrsiie’ the lrii-after since he
\nwas busy making pr’e__p”a1″at:iohs” t”o.go to Bombay. If
\nthe plaintiff has produ’Ced.’V_a{1y:’~p.i”o’t1o.te to be the
\none execL1t.eci”‘t}y.’ tliiisid\u00e9f\u00e9ndefI11..s._V:’ll is a forged
\ndocument.”i”v{TVhe7t’sL1.<i't'\u00ab…"is  for non-joihder of<\/p>\n
necessary pa1'tiVes.;"._ <\/p>\n
7. Defehclaivtts 5 also filed a detailed<\/p>\n
‘*,_wI”itfter1:sLatem”e’n.t._,____.The SEi11(‘,l’.lOl1 of Rs.30.000\/– on<\/p>\n
V”._q,2\/L12.1.98(3.._o’r___on the earlier dated 2.l2. 1980 in a<\/p>\n
 as alleged in the plaiiit were<\/p>\n
‘Vdenierl.”‘.a All the borrowiiigs were made by these
\nifdefe-iidaVrit,s on executing necessary records. It is<\/p>\n
 ‘denied that’. these defendants :~;21″e liable to pay<\/p>\n
ll\/i<\/p>\n
(6)<\/span><\/p>\n
_28_
\nthe dei’enda1’1ts 4 and 5
\nthe<\/p>\n
what amount?\n<\/p>\n
Whether<\/p>\n
owed to plaintiffs any and<\/p>\n
Whethex” any or both<\/p>\n
defendants<\/p>\n
along with other defeI1dants._ ‘ tho’-,x”
\nmake good the amounts 1′(s’u1’1″d*.ft\u00bbOhh”
\nbe due from the Ci,F51’6;\ufb02d\u00a71h’1\/5′<\/p>\n
and 5 and if so. what “a_ni–ounts?; ‘ \u00b0<\/p>\n
Whether the SLiitHx”i_t”>a;V niigs<\/p>\n
joinder 0f.ea.usesh’ of sajetji’0.n’?<\/p>\n
Whether t.h_e ‘ fV1\u00a7~–. “b~i::;V::r7-ed by
\n11n1:.:t’91._ti:’on?I_ N h ‘V V<\/p>\n
 “the  Claimed are<\/p>\n
principles<\/p>\n
 st opp e i”  agai’i.ye 1* 21 n d 21 C’. q U ie scene e’?<\/p>\n
 Vvere negligent in pe1’i”01’manee of<\/p>\n
Whe’t~he:’  defendantis 1 and 2<\/p>\n
 duties in not applying for<\/p>\n
 not obtaining license under<\/p>\n
‘fie money lender Act’?\n<\/p>\n
Whether the defendants 1 and 2<\/p>\n
are liable to pay to the<\/p>\n
the amount lost to it on accotlnt of<\/p>\n
the dismissal of the suit ()5<\/p>\n
the<\/p>\n
1 and 2 are <\/p>\n
of<\/p>\n
;:)lamtiff<\/p>\n
-29.”\n<\/p>\n
N654\/\u00a3980? And if so. what is the<\/p>\n
extent of their liability’?\n<\/p>\n
(13) What relief’?\n<\/p>\n
9. The claim against. defendants 4 and
\ngiven up. To substantiate the claim of
\n1 to 3. plaintiff examined a_;\u00bbSS_B
\naddition. they have produced
\nare marked as Ex.P.1    <\/p>\n
defendants. no evidence wa_s..ad.d’u_ced.l  <\/p>\n
10. The trial  1-_alfj’p_re’c’ilalion of the<\/p>\n
aforesaiidl”o’rf.ali.anddoceu’-menla’*i’y evidence on record
\nheld the lp_lalinili~ff1’s ‘a_reA..\u00bbp_r:operly represented: The<\/p>\n
plaintiff  esi.a_bAl’i_vsli.,e1d that the loan granted to<\/p>\n
 defendallfitwas unauthorised: 3″‘ defendant<\/p>\n
lfowelili.io._l’L’h;e\u00bb. jp1..ainiiff’ in a sum of Rs.1.41.708.50\/–<\/p>\n
as .Cli’ain1etll’r:’j_iln’lhe plaini; The case of fraud. breach<\/p>\n
Cof  falsificaiion of accounts alleged in the<\/p>\n
..fpfa’il1’i.fL is not established. The claim against<\/p>\n
‘edl\u00e9lfendants 4 and 5 was not pressed. Both<\/p>\n
l”,VHdefe1ida11i.s l and 2 are liable along wiih other<\/p>\n
‘LL\/,_<\/p>\n
-31″\n<\/p>\n
an audit report. the findings recorded by the trial
\nCourt; is vitiated.\n<\/p>\n
Thirdly, it was contended the Managing<\/p>\n
Director cannot be held personally liable ifflany<\/p>\n
one of the customer has not repaid V.
\namount. When once the plea of fraud islli:..egai\u00e9.iiled’.-..l
\nwhen 8″? defendant — the cnstorner’iszal;soV:”a_\u00a7a’r’t:y”1<\/p>\n
to the proceedings, it’ is _operi?_to”,_t.he <\/p>\n
recover from the 3rd de[‘e’11r.d’ant t.h\u00abels.a_”1_;d ‘*=a\ufb01n”oum
\nand there was no ol\u00a33~li.giit,iO”n ‘oil til’? Darlt’*of”lthe ls’
\ndefendant. to Clear the said\u00bbVan1o_ni’nft….and therefore,<\/p>\n
he Cont,e1ided,\u00abs:ee_11  the judgment<\/p>\n
and dectre-el  requires to be set\u00bb<\/p>\n
aside. PlerullVcolntr’a.”diiearned counsel for the<\/p>\n
1*espo{nder1ts ‘supported the impugned judgment<\/p>\n
 ‘
\n lr1._t*l<1.e"  of the facts and rival eoritentions,<\/p>\n
t.he'-.followihL.g points arise for Consideration in this<\/p>\n
-32-<\/span><\/p>\n
(1) Whether the 1*’ and 2*” defendants
\nare liable to pay the money due
\nfrom the 3″-‘ defendant to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff as held by the trial Court?<\/p>\n
{2} Whether the suit filed without <\/p>\n
report was maintainable’?\n<\/p>\n
{3} When a case of fraud, <\/p>\n
trust is held t.o be
\nis the 1~”*’- defendant liabletlo pa’3(it~he\u00ab. it
\nsuit claim? T A it <\/p>\n
l3. Po1’ntNo.1
\nThe material  re.eord’ ‘\u00abdi.s’\u20ac\u00bb1Aoses H that the
\nplaintiff is a V PriVa_te:’ ‘(l3:._on=l1par1y. 1.9’<\/p>\n
defenda,nt.* was”apL\u00a7)oi’i’iit.e’das a l\\\/Ianaging Director<\/p>\n
of the saidltColi;1;5a.n’yA;} At. the relevant point of<\/p>\n
 time;\u00a7OO to<\/p>\n
]L\/..\n<\/p>\n
“33-\n<\/p>\n
the 3}” defendant. — a customer of t.he plaintiff on
\nhis supplying 100 C[i.iiI’lEalS of arraclsianut. The<\/p>\n
material on record discloses apart from ___the<\/p>\n
aforesaid transactions on severai OCCElSlOF}”S~.,i”‘.3″”‘j<\/p>\n
defendant has been paid money by <\/p>\n
The specific case pleaded by _t_h,e__pla–in’tl’i’ill”_’:is”=that.v’<\/p>\n
the mana\u00e9iing director was 7–_not”A.’\u00e9iiithOrise”d”*~..,4t’tc-.i_A<\/p>\n
advance any sum in exeess=.__of
\nthe prior approval oi’ the Boa-1f:d-.yot’ D’iitel_c’torVS. The<\/p>\n
present transaction ‘=,\\i’as’._ 1:’_eve’*r_'<.brought to the
\nnotice of the Board asst-v,n'ec:e.sspa1?y'.enii':'ies were not<\/p>\n
made in the .()l'. a:'eeotin.ts' niaiiitained by the<\/p>\n
Company aindbihe"i_ei1pt'.i'ije eorn\ufb02pany was managed by
\ndei"enda"nts._ ll  was never brought<\/p>\n
to the nVot'._'icr:: of Alil\ufb01\u20acTj_."'b0E1I'Cl. On 3.3.1982. 1*"<\/p>\n
defengjdant resigned." Subsequently, 2"" defendant<\/p>\n
a'lso" It is on their resignations. when<\/p>\n
1a.ceo1li1.tTs.._pwere}. checked, then they found these<\/p>\n
 comrnitted by defendants 1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n
fptnimedyiaijeely. a legal notice was issued. The books<\/p>\n
fof’ ‘a~c;count.s maintained in the plaintiffwcompany<\/p>\n
.’j_.d”ob”i’1:ot disclose the receipt of 100 bags of<\/p>\n
_34w<\/p>\n
araekanut on the basis of which the amount was
\ntent to the 3″-‘ defendant. The evidence on record
\ndiscloses that. 15>’ defendant was not authorised to
\nmake any payment without. securing prope1ft,yjrfo.r
\nthe due repayment. The procedure
\nwhenever a payment is made under <\/p>\n
on the backside of the debit1;.””t_j}_1e <\/p>\n
secured as a security_.Vi7,..”–.t”he ag_1iic’u\u00b0itti;r’avlV<\/p>\n
produces is clearly n1ent.io’ne’d. T’h._ereafte~r,”that.<\/p>\n
product is taken in.t”o~.,.aceotirit;i’i’on1 thv-e”c’ornpany
\nby making appropriate e’nt:rie.s1″-find’*__the inward<\/p>\n
register and  sable 1.0}?  ajprodticts. after<\/p>\n
adjusttVnent’,i’\u00abithe  wasvdwrioriilaily discharged.<\/p>\n
As aforesaid. ‘if”a*ny<.__Ir;\u00bboney is tent in excess of<\/p>\n
Rs.10(_3O\/.d'"E31'i'o.Fi-.Pe–1'bm~.i"ssion of the Board was a<\/p>\n
"'."mLES"E':\u00ab:. _in fac"t);\u00ab___1_,__h\u00a2e documents produced in the<\/p>\n
 c;:Aa'e.e"as':'  pointed by the trial Judge. all the<\/p>\n
r'es'o'_iut.'i'o"1*:s.t"a'i'e in handwriting of the 15'<\/p>\n
defe-.nda.n~i._d'<j'..–Ai it does not disclose that this<\/p>\n
".t'ra11sa~ct'i;.on was brought to the notice of the board<\/p>\n
 any point' 01' time. in fact. in the written<\/p>\n
–if.–st–at’eArI1ent’. the 1*” dC’f\u20acIld\u00a3-111E. pleads ignorance<\/p>\n
\\\\\/.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
-35,<\/p>\n
document produced and marked in the case
\nshowing that there was a debit note for 100 bags
\nof arrackanut do not represent. a genuine
\ntransaction. It is in this background
\nis to be appreciated. But. none of the  V’
\nhave entered into the
\ncontent by cross examining
\nthe Company. His  “ho
\nassistance in provin_sg.the  but
\nthrough him they  documents
\nmaintained   ‘business by
\nthe piainiti’\u00a7:i”,(__b’an’.i;Iilihtetdsttttdddtproduced the
\nmemor;an’dVnt1ntV5\u00bbv’_V  01′ association.<\/p>\n
promissory note by the 3*” defendant at<\/p>\n
the tirne  Rs.9-4,600\/m. He has<\/p>\n
V.”{)_I’OC’…1.i:'(?f;’CA1 L?aAbOL1i.'”2’G’vd\u00a3?biI notes showing that 3*”-<\/p>\n
“‘~ae’;’e_n’d\u00e9.-mi.t;\\:;1s-. a regular customer to whom the<\/p>\n
arrtohtintsytwicrle paid and in the back side of the<\/p>\n
“said debit notes, there is no ment.ion about any<\/p>\n
‘=_secLi’rity having been taken from him. The account<\/p>\n
ibogoks produced in the case shows either on<\/p>\n
 27.6.1980 or on other dates. there is any entry in<\/p>\n
via<\/p>\n
l in I’ t. ii. .\n<\/p>\n
_38i<\/p>\n
has failed to perform his statutory obligations. It
\nis not only one transaction. There are more than
\n20 transactions where money has been paid tov’–t_he<\/p>\n
3″‘ defendant contrary to the proced.ure.7i”-Ttfhe-.,<\/p>\n
accountant who was in employment  it<\/p>\n
who has been given p1’on1otion:-‘aihd.yatithve:Ai;ele:vva:ntx’v..
\npoint oi’ time who was the
\nfailed to bring it to the
\nand directors about,these—–iljrregiilaritjievsy.He is
\nalso a party to this”  In fact, the
\ndisciplinary pr’oce_edi:n”gVs’weVi*e._l:i.iiV.litli’.a.i:\u00abe’\u00bbdllagainst him<\/p>\n
and therea “terI__*.’_ it  __ was  ilwithdrawn on his<\/p>\n
resignat.ionl’.”‘\u20ac5’VRig:htlyghe  not challenged the
\nsaid order.” He.al:_ls.o”‘d__i\u00e9:i.not step into the witness<\/p>\n
box to _subslta_i1tia’–i.e”pthlell defences which he has put<\/p>\n
  Invv.:’t\u00abVhesje._}e.ircumstances. we are of the View<\/p>\n
_  that-..__thev~fivnsdlings recorded by the trial Court that<\/p>\n
 .4″-__VVI”‘iQ[r or1ly__l’the 3?” defendant is liable to pay the said<\/p>\n
4″7″c?..__II’if.,)_L1l.f1′[, even defendants l and 2 because of<\/p>\n
 _la__\u00a7)ses. latches. negligence in discharging their<\/p>\n
\u00a239\u00ab~<\/p>\n
dues in unauthorisedly tending money to the 3″”
\ndefendant. We do not  any jtistificatioii to
\ninterfere with the well considered order passed by
\nthe triai Court holding that all of them are liable<\/p>\n
to pay the said amount.\n<\/p>\n
14. Point No.2<\/p>\n
It is a fact that audit report
\nbefore the Court. The suit .d
\nreport. The suit is  o”n_h”t.he
\nshowing the payment to  Debit
\nnotes are  “Hdisputed.\n<\/p>\n
Promisisory  i’s”~._pr_o_dueed which is not
\ndisputed’.. TheVae–eo’u__n’t'”.books are produced to<\/p>\n
showjvtihpat   araekanut for which this<\/p>\n
‘a’rno’uni.7*vtfas adtfaneed was never taken into<\/p>\n
 plaintiff and above all the 3″”\n<\/p>\n
defe..ndan~tradlrnitted the transaction and he pleads<\/p>\n
x”i\u00ab___V’diseha’rVgAe and he has failed to establish the plea<\/p>\n
 “o_iVd_is”;eharge. Under these eiretiinstanees. the trial<\/p>\n
  Cdurt was justified in ignoring the fact though no<\/p>\n
“audit: report was produced. as the ease was based<\/p>\n
\\\/<\/p>\n
-41″\n<\/p>\n
to the Claim made by the plaintiff independent. of<\/p>\n
fraud and breach of trust. When the plaintiff has<\/p>\n
established his Claim. the trial Court. was ju\ufb01s..tV_i’-{died<\/p>\n
in Coming to the said Conclusion. We dQ:__1;iOf :”~S_\u20ac’\u20ac__x’_<\/p>\n
any merit in this appeal. Accsif\u00bbdiz1g1},”.””ti*{:e..V\u00e9igjp-eaiy\u00e9 <\/p>\n
is dismissed. Parties to bear t1f1\u20aci\u00a7,”‘–Qtk\\’Ii=,CO.SV’L’S_’~~U,,,,_ <\/p>\n
AH8 \/ bnj:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009 Author: N.Kumar And C.R.Kumaraswamy M1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE IDATED THIS THE 7″” DAY OF IDECECMBFCR. 2009 PRESENT THE I”iON’BLE3 MR.\u00ab-JUSTICE N.KUM.AR AND THE HONBLE2 MRJUSTICE C.ra.KuMARAS.–ii2\\}’A;$\/i\ufb01ff’ REGULAR FIRST APPEAL Ns;3.1.ioif.\u00e9d4O’i’7; \u00bb’ BETVVEEN […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-189180","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nG Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - 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\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-01-12T06:51:57+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=\"29 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"G Shyama Bhat S\\\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-12T06:51:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":5847,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\",\"name\":\"G Shyama Bhat S\\\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-12T06:51:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"G Shyama Bhat S\\\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - 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\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-01-12T06:51:57+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":"29 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-12T06:51:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009"},"wordCount":5847,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009","name":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka ... on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-12T06:51:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-shyama-bhat-so-ishwara-bhat-vs-karnataka-vyavasaya-varthaka-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"G Shyama Bhat S\/O Ishwara Bhat vs Karnataka Vyavasaya Varthaka … on 7 December, 2009"}]},{"@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\/189180","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=189180"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189180\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=189180"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=189180"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=189180"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}