{"id":208258,"date":"1961-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1961-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961"},"modified":"2016-06-23T23:17:51","modified_gmt":"2016-06-23T17:47:51","slug":"73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","title":{"rendered":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 403, \t\t 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 73<\/div>\n
Author: S C.<\/div>\n
Bench: Shah, J.C.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\n73JYOTI BHUSHAN GUPTA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE BANARAS BANK LTD\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n12\/10\/1961\n\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nSINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ)\nSUBBARAO, K.\nMUDHOLKAR, J.R.\n\nCITATION:\n 1962 AIR  403\t\t  1962 SCR  Supl. (1)  73\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1971 SC 218\t (5)\n\n\nACT:\n     Limitation-Order  of   high  Court\t directing\ncontributors to\t pay money  to liquidator-Order if\npassed in  exercise  of\t ordinary  original  Civil\njurisdiction-Execution\tapplication  filed  beyond\nthree years-If\tbarred-Indian Limitation  Act 1908\n(IX of\t1908), Art. 183-Indian Companies Act, 1913\n(VII of\t 1913), ss  and 199-Letters  Patent of the\nAllahabad High Court.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The Banaras  Bank Ltd.  was  ordered  by  the\nAllahabad High\tCourt to be compulsorily wound up.\nThe High Court passed an order under s. 187 of the\nIndian\tCompanies   Act,   1913,   directing   the\nappellants, whose  names had  been placed  on  the\nlist of\t contributors, to  pay a  certain  sum\tof\nmoney to  the official\tLiquidator.  The  official\nLiquidator applied for execution of the order more\nthan three  years after\t the making  thereof.  The\nappellants   contended\t  that\t  the\t execution\napplication,  not  having  Been\t preferred  within\nthree years  as prescribed  by\tArt.  182  of  the\nLimitation Act was barred. The official Liquidator\ncontended that\tthe order was made in the exercise\nof ordinary  original civil  jurisdiction  by  the\nHigh Court  and the  application was  governed\tby\nArt. 183  which prescribed  a period of limitation\nof twelve years.\n^\n     Held, that\t Art. 183  was applicable  to  the\ncase and  the application for execution was within\ntime. The  order was Made by the High Court in the\nexercise   of\t its   ordinary\t  original   civil\njurisdiction as\t contemplated in  Art. 183. Though\nthe Letters  Patent did\t not invest the High Court\nwith  any   original  jurisdiction   it\t could\tbe\nconferred by  legislation.  The\t Indian\t Companies\nAct,  1913,  invested  the  High  Court\t with  the\njurisdiction to\t order payment\tof amounts  due by\ndebtors of  companies ordered  to be wound up. The\njurisdiction was  ordinary, it\tdid not\t depend on\nand extraordinary  action on  the part of the High\nCourt. It  was original\t as  a\tpetition  for  the\nexercise of  it was  entertained by the High Court\nas a  court of:\t first\tinstance  and  not  as\tan\nappellate  court,   and\t since\t the  High   Court\nadjudicated upon  the liability\t of the\t debtor to\npay  debts   due  by   him  to\t the  company  the\njurisdiction was civil.\n     In the  matter of\tCandas Narondas,  Navivahu\nand C.\tA; Turner, I. L. R. (1889) 13 Bom. 520 and\nP. T. Munia Cervai\n74\nv. The\tHunuman Bnak  Ltd., I.L.R (1958) Mad. 658,\nreferred to\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION: Civil APPEAL No.
\n198 of 1956.\n<\/p>\n
     Appeal from  the judgment\tand  decree  dated
\nAugust 24,  1950, of  the Allahabad  High Court in
\nExecution First Appeal No. 399 of 1947.\n<\/p>\n
     Gopi Nath\tKunzru and  Ganpat  Rai,  for  the
\nappellants
\n     G. S.  Pathak  and\t G.  C.\t Mathur,  for  the
\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n
     1961. October  l 2. The Judgment of the Court
\nwas delivered by
\n     SHAH,  J.-The   Banaras  Bank  Ltd.-a  public
\nlimited company\t having its  registered office\tat
\nBanaras-(hereinafter referred  to as the Bank) was
\nordered on March l, 1 940 to be compulsorliy wound
\nup by  the High\t Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
\nand  the  Official  Liquidator\twas  appointed\tto
\nconduct\t the   proceedings  in\t winding  up.\tOn
\nSeptember 12,  1942, an order was made by the High
\nCourt under  s. 187  of the  Indian Companies Act,
\n1913 (VII of 1913) for payment of unpaid calls and
\nthe appellants\tJyoti  Bhushan\tGupta.\tand  Gokul
\nChand, whose  names had been placed on the list of
\ncontributors, were  directed to\t pay with interest
\nRs. 95,178\/5\/9\tto the\tofficial Liquidator of the
\nBank. This  order was,\tby virtue of s. 199 of the
\nAct, enforceable in the manner in which the decree
\nof the High Court made in any suit pending therein
\nmay be\tenforced. On September 12, 1946, the order
\nwas transferred\t to the\t District Judge, Allahabad
\nfor execution. On September 23, 1946, the official
\nLiquidator  applied   to   the\t District   Court,
\nAllahabad  for\t execution  of\t the  order  dated
\nSeptember  12,\t 1942,\tand  prayed  that  certain
\namounts due  to\t the  appellants  be  attached\tin
\nsatisfaction   of   the\t  claim.   The\t execution
\nproceedings were transferred by the District Judge
\n75<\/span>
\nto the\tCivil  Judge,  Allahabad.  The\tappellants
\ncontended Inter\t alia that  as the application for
\nexecution was  not preferred within 3 years of the
\norder for payment as prescribed by Art. 182 of the
\nFirst Schedule of the Limitation Act it was barred
\nby the\tlaw of limitation. The official Liquidator
\ncontended that\tthe application\t was  governed\tby
\nArt. 183  of the  Act  and  that,  in  any  event,
\ncertain part payments having been made towards the
\nclaim by  the appellants, the period of limitation
\nwas  extended\tthereby.  At   the  hearing,   the
\nalternative plea  of part payment was abandoned by
\nthe Official Liquidator.\n<\/p>\n
     The Civi1 Judge held that the application for
\nexecution was  barred limitation  as  it  was  not
\npreferred within  3 years  from the  order of  the
\nHigh  Court.  In  appeal  to  the  High\t Court\tof
\nAllahabad, the order passed by the Civil Judge was
\nreversed and  the proceedings were remitted to the
\nCivil  Judge  with  a  direction  to  restore  the
\nexecution application  to its  original number and
\nto proceed  with it according to law. Against that
\norder with  certificate of  fitness granted by the
\nHigh Court  under Art.\t133 of\tthe  Constitution,
\nthis appeal is preferred.\n<\/p>\n
     Counsel for  the Company  contended that  the
\norder passed  by the  High Court not being a final
\norder the  appeal on  certificate granted  by this
\nHigh  Court  is\t not  maintainable.  We\t have  not
\nthought\t it   necessary,  having   regard  to  the
\nimportance  of\t the  question\t raised\t  by   the
\nappellants and\tthe fact  that this Court may in a
\nproper case  regularise\t the  proceeding  in  this
\nCourt  by   granting  special\tleave,\t even\tif
\ncertificate under  Art. 133  of\t the  Constitution
\ncould not be issued by the High Court, to hear the
\nparties on  the question as to the maintainability
\nof the\tappeal OD  the certificate  and have heard
\nthe appeal on the merits.\n<\/p>\n
     We are  of the view that the appeal must fail
\non the merits.\n<\/p>\n
76<\/span><\/p>\n
     Art.  182\t of  the   Indian  Limitation  Act
\nprovides a  period of  3 years\tfor an application
\nfor execution  of a  decreer an order of any Civil
\nCourt not  provided by\tArt. 183  or s.\t 48 of the
\nCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of l908). By Art.
\n183 a period of l2 years for enforcing a judgment,
\ndecree\tor order of any Court established by Royal
\nCharter in  the exercise  of its ordinary original
\ncivil jurisdiction  is prescribed  and the  period
\ncommences to  run from the date on which a present
\nright to  enforce the  judgment, decree\t or  order
\naccrues to  some person\t capable of. releasing the
\nright. The  order sought  to be\t executed was  not
\npassed by  the High  Court in the trial of a suit:
\nit was\tpassed in  exercise  of\t the  jurisdiction
\nconferred upon\tthe High  Court by  s. 187  of the
\nIndian Companies  s Act,  1913. Section\t 3 of  the
\nIndian Companies  Act by sub-s.(1) enacts that the
\nCourt having  jurisdiction under this Act shall be
\nthe High Court having jurisdiction in the place at
\nwhich the  registered office  of  the  company\tis
\nsituate. By  the proviso,  the Central\tGovernment
\nmay  by\t  notification\tin  the\t official  Gazette
\nempower any District Court to  exercise all or any
\nof the jurisdiction conferred upon the High Court.
\nBut it\tis  common  ground  that  no  notification
\nconferring   jurisdiction   and\t  empowering   the
\nDistrict Court\tat  Banaras-where  the\tregistered
\noffice of  the company\tis situate-to  pass orders
\nunder B.  187 has  been issued. The High Court was
\ntherefore the only Court competent to direct under
\nB. 187\tof the Indian Companies Act payment of the
\namount due from the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
\t  Counsel for the appellants contends that
\nthe authority  exercised  by  the  High\t Court\tin
\ndirecting payment  under  s.  187  of  the  Indian
\nCompanies Act,\t1913,  is  neither  ordinary,  nor
\noriginal civil.\t He  submits  that  by\ts.  187\t a
\nspecial power  is vested  in the High Court by the
\nIndian Companies  Act, 1913,  which is exercisable
\nin its\textraordinary jurisdiction.  To appreciate
\nthis argument  it is  necessary to  refer  to  the
\nstatute authorising the establish-\n<\/p>\n
77<\/span><\/p>\n
ment of\t the High  Court, and  the Letters  Patent
\nconstituting the same.\n<\/p>\n
\t    The High  Court for\t the North Western
\nProvince, of which the Allahabad High Court is the
\nsuccessor, was\tconstituted by\tthe Letters Patent
\nissued on  March 17,  1866,  in\t exercise  of  the
\npowers conferred  by cl.  16 of the Charter Act of
\n1861 (24.25  Vict. C.  104). By\t that clause,  Her
\nMajesty the  Queen was\tauthorised to  establish a
\nHigh Court  and to invest the High Court with such
\njurisdiction, powers  and authority  as under  the
\nCharter Act  may by  cl. 9  be conferred  upon the
\nHigh  Court  to\t be  established  in  any  of  the
\npresidencies, i.  e., calcutta, Bombay and Madras.
\nThe High  Courts of  Calcutta, Bombay  and Madras,
\nwhich were  popularly known as the Presidency High
\nCourts were  by cl. 12 of their respective Letters
\nPatent\tinvested   with\t ordinary  original  civil
\njurisdiction to\t entertain and\ttry suits of every
\ndescription  subject  to  the  restriction  as\tto
\nterritorial  limitations   contained  in   cl.\t11
\nthereof. But by its Letters Patent, the High Court
\nfor the\t North Western\tProvince was  not invested
\nwith jurisdiction  to  entertain  civil\t suits\tin
\nexercise   of\t its   ordinary\t  original   civil
\njurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n
     Counsel  for   the\t appellants  submits  that
\nArt.183 applies\t only to decrees and orders passed
\nby  the\t High  Courts  established  by\tthe  Royal
\nCharter,   which   by\ttheir\tconstitution   are
\nauthorised to  entertain, hear and try civil suits
\nin exercise  of their ordinary civil jurisdiction,
\nand as\tno  such  power\t was  conferred\t upon  the
\nAllahabad High\tCourt,\tthe  order  sought  to\tbe
\nexecuted  was\tnot  passed  in\t exercise  of  the
\nordinary original  civil jurisdiction.\tIt is true
\nthat when  the Letters Patent were issued the High
\nCourt had  no jurisdiction under a law relating to
\ncompanies of  the nature  exercised  by\t the  High
\nCourt,\tthe   character\t whereof   falls   to\tbe
\ndetermined in  this appeal.  But by  cl. 16 of the
\nCharter Act  and cl.  35 of  the Letters Patent of
\nthe Allahabad High Court jurisdiction
\n78<\/span>
\nwhich Was  not initially  conferred upon  the High
\nCourt could  the conferred  by legislation  within
\nthe competence\tof the Governor-General in Council
\nand the\t Governor in Council. By the Companies Act
\nof  1913,   the\t High\tCourt  was  invested  with
\njurisdiction to\t order payment\tof the amounts due
\nby debtors  of companies  ordered to  be wound up.
\nThis jurisdiction  may\tbe  invoked  as\t of  right
\nagainst all  persons whose names are placed on the
\nlist  of   contributors.   The\t jurisdiction\tis
\nordinary: it  does not depend on any extraordinary
\naction\ton   the  part\tof  the\t High  Court.  The
\njurisdiction is also original in character because
\nthe petition  for exercise  of the jurisdiction is
\nentertainable by  the High  Court as  a\t court\tof
\nfirst  instance\t  and  not   in\t exercise  of  its
\nappellate jurisdiction. Again by s. 187 no special
\njurisdiction  is   conferred.\tThe   High   Court
\nadjudicates upon  the liability\t of the\t debtor to
\npay  debts   due  by   him  to\tthe  Company:  the
\njurisdiction  is   therefore  civil.  Normally,\t a
\ncreditor has  to file  a suit to enforce liability
\nfor payment  of a debt due to him from him debtor.
\nThe Legislature has by s. 187 of the Companies Act
\nempowered the  High Court  in a summary proceeding
\nto determine  the liability  and to  pass an order
\nfor  payment,\tbut  on\t  that\taccount\t the  real
\ncharacter of  the jurisdiction\texercised  by  the
\nHigh Court  is\tnot  altered.  Nor  is\tthere  any
\nsubstance in  the contention that the authority to
\norder payment  of a  debt under s. 187 is merely a
\npower of  the High Court and not its jurisdiction.
\nBy s.  3 read with s. 187 of the Companies Act the
\nHigh Court  has jurisdiction  to direct payment of
\nthe amount  due by  a contributory:  and an  order
\npassed for  payment manifestly\tis an order passed
\nin exercise of the jurisdiction vested in the High
\nCourt by  s. 3\tread with  8. 187 of the Companies
\nAct.\n<\/p>\n
\t    The Judicial  Committee of\tthe  Privy
\nCouncil was  called upon  In the  matter of Candas
\nNarondas Navivahu and C. A. Turner(1) to determine
\nthe true
\n     (1) I. L. R. (1889) 13, Eom. 520.\n<\/p>\n
79<\/span><\/p>\n
nature of  the jurisdiction  exercised by the High
\nCourt  of  judicature  at  Bombay  in  respect\tof
\ninsolvent debtors.  The Privy  Council\theld  that
\narticle\t 180   of  Schedule   II  of   the  Indian
\nLimitation Act\tXV of  1877 (which  was similar to
\narticle 183  of the  Indian Limitation\tAct, l908)
\napplies to a judgment of a Court for the relief of
\ninsolvent ebtors  entered up in the High Court, in
\naccordance with\t section 86  of the Statute 11 and
\n12 Vic.,  c. 21.  It was  held in  that case  that
\nalthough    a\t Court\t  exercising\tinsolvency
\njurisdiction  determines   the\tsubstance  of  the
\nquestion relating  to an  insolvent’s estate, the,
\nproceedings in\texecution and the judgment are the
\nHigh Court’s.  The judgment  is entered\t up in the
\nordinary course\t of the\t duty cast  upon the  High
\nCourt by  the law,  not by way of special or extra
\nordinary  action,  but\tin  the\t exercise  of  its
\nordinary   original   civil   jurisdiction.   Lord
\nHobhouse delivering  the judgment  of the judicial
\ncommittee observed:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t “But it was strongly contended at
\n     the bar  that this\t jurisdiction though civil
\n     and original, was not ordinary: and Mr. Rugby
\n     argued that the passages of the Charter which
\n     have  just\t  been\t epitomised   divide   the
\n     jurisdiction   into   four\t  classes-ordinary
\n     original, extraordinary  original, appellate,
\n     and  those\t special  matters  which  are  tho
\n     subject of\t special and  separate provisions.
\n     But their\tLordships are  of the opinion that
\n     the   expression\t “ordinary   jurisdiction”
\n     embraces all  such as  is\texercised  in  the
\n     ordinary  course\tof  law\t and  without  any
\n     special step being necessary to assume it and
\n     that   it\t is   opposed\tto   extraordinary
\n     jurisdiction, which  the Court  may assume at
\n     its discretion  upon special occasions and by
\n     special orders.  They are\tconfirmed in  this
\n     view by  observing that, in the next group of
\n     clauses which indicated the law to be applied
\n     by the Court to the various clauses of cases,
\n     there  is\t not  a\t  four-fold  division\tof
\n     jurisdiction,  but\t a  three-fold\tone,  into
\n     ordinary, extraordinary,
\n80<\/span>
\n\t   and appellate. The judgment of 1868 was
\n     entered up\t by the\t High Court, not by way of
\n     special or\t discretionary action,\tbut in the
\n     ordinary course  of the  duty cast upon it by
\n     law, according  to which  every other case of
\n     the same  kind would  be dealt  with. It was,
\n     therefore, entered\t up  in\t exercise  of  the
\n     ordineary original\t civil jurisdiction of the
\n     High Court.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Council for  the appellants  contended that by cl.
\n18 of  the letters Patent the High Court of Bombay
\nwas invested  with insolvency jurisdiction whereas
\nthe High Court of Allahabad is not invested by the
\nLetters Patent with any jurisdiction in the matter
\nof companies  and therefore  the principle  of “In
\nre-Candas Narondas”  does not apply. But under cl.
\n18 of  the Letters Patent a Judge or Judges of the
\nHigh Court  are to  sit as  a Court  for relief of
\ninsolvent debtors  and powers and authorities with
\nrespect to original and appellate jurisdiction are
\nto be deter mined by reference to the law relating
\nto insolvent  debtors. The  jurisdiction  to  deal
\nwith the  claims of  companies ordered to be wound
\nup is conferred by the Indian Companies Act and to
\nthat extent the Letters Patent are modified. There
\nis, however, no difference in the character of the
\noriginal civil\tjurisdiction  which  is\t conferred
\nupon the  High Court  by Letters  Patent  and  the
\njurisdiction conferred\tby special  Acts. When\tin
\nexercise of  its authority  conferred by a special
\nstatute the High court in an application presented
\nto it  as  a  court  of\t first\tinstance  declares
\nliability  to\tpay  a\t debt,\tthe   jurisdiction
\nexercised  is\toriginal  and  civil  and  if  the
\nexercise of that jurisdiction does not depend upon
\nany  preliminary   step\t  invoking   exercise\tof
\ndiscretion of  the High Court, the jurisdiction is
\nordinary.\n<\/p>\n
\t  In P. T. Munia Servai v The Hanuman Bank
\nLtd, Tanjore (1), a Division Bench of the Madras
\n(I) 1. L. R. (1958) Mad. 685
\n81<\/span>
\nHigh Court  by the  Banking Companies Act, ]949 (X
\nof  1949)   is\tpart   of   its\t  ordinary   civil
\njurisdiction within the meaning of Art. 183 of the
\nLimitation Act\tand an order passed in exercise of
\nits  ordinary\toriginal  Civil\t  Jurisdiction\tis
\ngoverned by  Art. 183  and not\tby Art. 182 of the
\nLimitation Act.\t In that  case on  an  application
\npreferred  by\tthe  Official  Liquidator  of  the
\nHanuman Bank  Ltd., a direction for payment by the
\nHigh  Court  of\t certain  sums\tof  money  by  the
\nappellant Munia\t on or\tbefore a  certain date was
\nmade. To  an application  for enforcement  of that
\nliability Art.\t183 of the Limitation Act was held
\napplicable.\n<\/p>\n
     In our  view, the\tHigh Court  was right  ill
\nholding that  the application  for execution filed
\nby the\tofficial Liquidator was within limitation.
\nThe appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed with
\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t Appeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India 73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 403, 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 73 Author: S C. Bench: Shah, J.C. PETITIONER: 73JYOTI BHUSHAN GUPTA Vs. RESPONDENT: THE BANARAS BANK LTD DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12\/10\/1961 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ) […]<\/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-208258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\n73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - 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\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\" \/>\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=\"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-23T17:47:51+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961\",\"datePublished\":\"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-23T17:47:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\"},\"wordCount\":2375,\"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\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\",\"name\":\"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-23T17:47:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961\"}]},{\"@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":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - 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\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-23T17:47:51+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961","datePublished":"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-23T17:47:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961"},"wordCount":2375,"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\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961","name":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1961-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-23T17:47:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/73jyoti-bhushan-gupta-vs-the-banaras-bank-ltd-on-12-october-1961#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"73Jyoti Bhushan Gupta vs The Banaras Bank Ltd on 12 October, 1961"}]},{"@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\/208258","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=208258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/208258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=208258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=208258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=208258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}