{"id":199933,"date":"1984-03-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1984-03-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984"},"modified":"2016-12-10T16:06:45","modified_gmt":"2016-12-10T10:36:45","slug":"state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","title":{"rendered":"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984"},"content":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court<\/div>\n
State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: AIR 1984 Raj 107, 1984 WLN 141<\/div>\n
Author: K Sidhu<\/div>\n
Bench: K Sidhu<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 K.S. Sidhu, J. <\/p>\n
 Note:- The revision petition listed above was allowed on March 8, 1984, with the remarks that reasons for the acceptance will be given later Reasons are given as follows:\n<\/p>\n
Reasons.\n<\/p>\n
 1. This petition of revision under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. by the defendant in a suit. pending before the Additional Munsif. Jaipur City, is directed against the appellate order of the Additional Civil Judge. Jaipur city, affirming the order of the Additional Munsif, whereby the latter had granted a temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff in the suit restraining the defendant from selling the goods pledged by the plaintiff with the defendant to a third party and further mandating the defendant in effect to deliver the goods to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 6350\/- per metric tonne.\n<\/p>\n
2. The suit in which the extraordinary order of temporary injunction as aforementioned, was passed by the trial court and affirmed by the lower appellate court, has been filed by M\/s. Bal-labhdas and Sons, hereinafter called the firm, against the State Bank of Bikaner  and Jaipur, hereinafter called the Bank, for perpetual injunction restraining the Bank from selling the pledged floods to a third party, and. as the relief clause further proceeds, “from refusing to give delivery of the goods to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 6350\/- per metric tonne including import duty and miscellaneous charges”, and from committing breach of contract in any other manner, Ignoring the diversionary verbiage, snarl words and irrelevant ‘facts which constitute the bulk of the 60 pages of the plaint, the material facts, as gathered from the record, are as follows. The firm applied for and obtained from the Bank a letter of credit, dated Feb. 27, 1981, for the purpose of importing prime quality   CR ‘steel   sheets   and   other   similar goods specified in the said letter from M\/s.     Mercantile     Trading Co.  of Hong Kong.   The letter of credit issued by the Bank  authorised  M\/s.  Mercantile Trading Co. to draw on the firm bills for a sum not  exceeding     11.95 lacs  U.   S.  dollars, and the Bank undertook to honour    the documents  on   presentation.    The     goods valuing   11.78,839.96   lacs   U.   S.   dollars were   shipped   by   the  suppliers   on   Feb. 10,  1982. i. e. within the stipulated period of  shipment.    The  goods  were expected to be landed  in   India  by  the middle  of April  1982.    It appears    that    the     firm which   was   originally   confident   of   raising its own funds for retiring the documents,   paying import  duty  and meeting other   expenses   for   getting   the   delivery of  the  goods  on   landing  was   unable  to do  so.    The  firm  therefore  once     again approached   the   Bank   for   help.     Much against   its   earlier   assurances   in   writing to the Bank that  it would not  be needing   any   cash   credit   facility   for   getting the goods  cleared  and     obtaining     their delivery,  the firm  wrote to the Bank on March 3.   1982.     requesting for     a cash credit  pledge  limit  of  Rs.   115  lacs.    By its letter, dated. April 1. 1982, the Bank sanctioned  an   ad  hoc cash  credit  pledge limit   of  Rs.   115   lacs   for  a   period     of three months from the date of the landing of the goods on the terms and conditions     as     specified  in  the  said  letter. The firm signed the said letter accepting ail the terms and conditions therein.    The firm pledged  the bills of lading and the imported goods as collateral and security for the loans granted.    It also undertook to  deposit  Rs.   12.50   lacs   in   addition   to the  earlier  deposit  of  Rs.   7.50  lacs,  by way   of  margin   money.     The   firm   also agreed to deposit additional amount, over and     above    the    agreed    minimum of Rs.  20 lacs by way of margin,  in    the event  of variation  in  the exchange  rate. Another  important     condition.     accepted by the firm as a part  and parcel of the cash   credit   pledge     contract,      reads   as under:\n<\/p>\n
YOU will also be required to deposit in advance with our D. N. Road Bombay branch the custom duty, auxiliary duty, ad valorem charges, warehouse charges, clearing agent’s commission and all other miscellaneous charges in connection with taking delivery of the goods from Bonded Warehouse for storage with the Bank’s approved clearing Agent. Thereafter the floods will be delivered to you only against full payment for ultimate sale to the actual users.\n<\/p>\n
3.   The   Bank   retired   the   documents, took delivery of the floods and arranged for their  storage     in the bonded were-house on April 16. 1982.    Instead of paying the debt, which the firm was thus owing to the Bank, and redeeming    the pledged  goods,  the  firm  began  to question  the very  basis of the  agreement of cash   credit   pledge   limit.     It      addressed a letter.   dated.      July   14, 1982.   to   the Bank complaining that it could not properly   negotiate   the   terms   of   the   cash credit  pledge agreement   and  that   it  had been   compelled     to   sign  on  the   dotted line because it was  anxious to clear the goods without  any  further     loss.    This letter  was   followed   by     similar     other letters in which  the  firm     accused     the Bank of many acts of omission and commission,      causing     heavy  losses  to  the firm.   Finding  that     these  baseless    allegations against the Bank were counter-  productive,  the  firm     changed  its  stance and requested the Bank in Oct.  1982 for the   accommodation   of   redeeming      the goods  in instalments  on  payment  at  the rate of Rs.  3605\/- per metric tonne. The Bank did not  agree and  instead,  insisted on the  firm  offering  a  definite and time bound programme  for repayment of the entire amount of debt along with interest due   under   the   cash   credit   pledge’   account.    The  firm did not come out with any viable proposal, thus compelling the Bank  to give     notice  to the  firm of its intention   to   sell   the   pledged   goods   to realise  the  amount  due  from  the   firm. The firm replied that it had    customers in   view    who   were   willing   to   purchase the  goods  at  the  rate of  Rs.   7500\/-  per metric   tonne   and   that   the   Bank  would be selling the goods at a lower price at its  own risk.    The  Bank wrote  back on Nov.   16.   1982.  that  the  firm   may     cite firm offers in that behalf within a period of   one   week   from   the   date   of   receipt of the said letter failing which the Bank would   be   at   liberty   to   sell   the   goods at  the   best  available  price   without   any further  reference   to  the  firm.    This  led the   firm   to   file  the  suit,   out  of which this   revision   petition   has   arisen,   in   the court  of the  Additional  Munsif  and  obtain  the  temporary injunction   from  him restraining  the  Bank     from  selling the goods and mandating the Bank to deliver the goods to the    firm at    the    rate    of Rs.  635Q\/-  per  metric  tonne.\n<\/p>\n
4.   It will be seen    from    the    above narration of facts that if the courts below had bestowed proper care and attention to the sifting, so to say, of grain from the chaff of the plaint in the instant case, it would  have become at once clear to them that the firm had no prima facie case at all, and that it was trying to both approbate and reprobate, and had filed the present suit in an attempt to abuse the process of a court which had no pecuniary jurisdiction in the matter, It is a matter of regret that both the courts below were unable to discover these plain facts which become so apparent on a bare perusal of the plaint.\n<\/p>\n
5. As for approbation and reprobation, let us take up the agreement of cash credit pledge limit, dated. April 1, 1982. It is on the basis of this agreement that the firm has averred in the plaint that the transaction between it and the Bank is a pledge and that it is entitled to the delivery of goods to it by the Bank on payment of the debt of the Bank calculated at the rate of Rs. 6350\/- per metric tonne. In paragraph 28, of the selfsame Plaint, the firm challenged this agreement as null and void ob initio on the ground that its consent to it had been caused by coercion and undue influence. The firm is then seeking to specifically enforce what counsel describes as a variation in the terms of the original contract. It is alleged, that in the course of mutual discussion between the parties and their solicitors on Oct. 29, 1982, the representatives of the Bank proposed that the firm could take delivery of the goods on payment at the rate of Rs. 6350\/- inclusive of import duty and other charges, and that the representatives of the firm accepted this offer. A little later, in the plaint, the firm however pleaded that subsequently on its request for a written confirmation of the so-called oral contract dated Oct. 29. 1982, the Bank did not confirm it as required by the firm and instead notified the firm of its intention to sell the pledged goods to realise the debt which the firm was owing to the Bank.\n<\/p>\n
6. It will then be seen that the plaint discloses no cause of action either for the grant of the relief of perpetual injunction against the Bank or for the specific performance of any contract. Section 38. Specific Relief Act. 1963, lays down, inter alia, that perpetual injunction may be granted to prevent the breach of an obligation existing in favour of the plaintiff. ‘Obligation’ as defined in Section 2 of the same Act means a duty enforceable by law, nOW the plaint does not contain facts which, if proved, would impose on the  Bank an obligation to refrain from selling the pledged Hoods, On the contrary, the averments made in the plaint would show that the firm is suing the Bank as a pawnee, requiring the latter to refrain from selling the goods. Let alone the firm having any right and the Bank being subject to any corresponding obligation not to sell the goods. Section 176. Contract Act confers a right on the Bank as a pawnee, to sell the pledged goods after giving notice to the pawnor. It is admitted in the plaint that notice as contemplated by Section 176 Contract Act had already been served by the Bank on the firm before the institution of this suit. Thus the plaint does not disclose any cause of action for the grant of the relief of perpetnal injunction as prayed.\n<\/p>\n
7. Similarly, it does not disclose any cause of action for specific performance of any contract requiring the Bank to deliver to the firm the pledged goods against payment by the firm of an amount calculated at the rate of Rs. 6350 per metric tonne. As already indicated, the firm has not pleaded facts which, if proved, would establish its case that a new contract had come into being between the parties on Oct. 29. 1982, whereby the Bank had agreed to redeem the goods on payment at the rate of Rs. 6350 per metric tonne.\n<\/p>\n
8. On a proper construction of the plaint and the relief claimed therein, it is obvious that this is in substance, a suit for recovery of the pledged goods, inasmuch as the firm is seeking a decree against the Bank directing it to deliver the goods to the firm against the payment of price calculated at the rate of Rs. 6350\/- per tonne. The plaint which is in reality covered by Section 23(1)(a) Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. 1961, has been sought to beveiled to give the appearance of being a plaint in a suit for injunction covered by Section 26 of the said Act. The court must look to the substance rather than the form of the relief in order to adiudge the question of court fees and Jurisdiction. Obviously, the market value of the goods in dispute runs into lacs of rupees. The Additional Munsif in whose court the suit has been filed and who passed the impugned order of temporary injunction can entertain suits of a value not exceeding five thousand rupees. I must therefore hold that the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the ground of jurisdiction as well<\/p>\n
9. For all these resons, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated Jan. 27. 1084. of the Additional Civil Judge Jaipur City affirming the order dated Jan. 13. 1984. by the Additional Munsjf Jaipur City, is set aside. Instead, the firm’s application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 Equivalent citations: AIR 1984 Raj 107, 1984 WLN 141 Author: K Sidhu Bench: K Sidhu ORDER K.S. Sidhu, J. Note:- The revision petition listed above was allowed on March 8, 1984, with the remarks that reasons […]<\/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":[8,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-199933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - 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-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\" \/>\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=\"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-10T10:36:45+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=\"10 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-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984\",\"datePublished\":\"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-10T10:36:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\"},\"wordCount\":2089,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\",\"name\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-10T10:36:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984\"}]},{\"@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 Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - 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-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-10T10:36:45+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984","datePublished":"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-10T10:36:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984"},"wordCount":2089,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984","name":"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1984-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-10T10:36:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-and-jaipur-vs-firm-ballabh-das-and-sons-on-12-march-1984#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur vs Firm Ballabh Das And Sons on 12 March, 1984"}]},{"@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\/199933","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=199933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199933\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}