9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (12) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laintiff mill to one Bombay Textiles Agency, Sewapur, purnia, Bihar. The consignment of 43 bales of cloth was booked on various dates in Jan. and Feb. 1972 as detailed in plaint para 4. by road, through the carriers Messrs. Road Transport Company against respective motor transport receipts. The 24 bills of the said consignments, Motor Transport Receipts along with demand drafts were presented to the defendant Bank duly endorsed in favour of the defendant Bank, 3. The plaintiff company brought the suit against the defendant Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) for a claim of ₹ 81,075/50 towards cost of Bills and Hundies and interest, on the ground inter alia that the Bank in usual course of its business purchased bills for collection and credited the amount of such bills in the account of its customers and received Hundi-builty (Transport Receipts) duly endorsed in its favour for presentation to the concerned party to secure its collection. The plaintiff company was one of its such customers who besides other accounts had a "Bill purchase account" with the Bank. The plaintiff averred that a respresentative of Bombay Textile Agency, Semapur, District Purnia, Bi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ills or documents and no purchase as such is involved in any of the transactions. The Bank pleaded the usual practice followed by it in the ordinary course of its business in the matter of collection of bills accompanied with relevant documents like this. The Bank acts only as a collecting agent merely earning a commission and receive the usual handling charges. The documents are endorsed in favour of the Bank with a view to facilitate collection and also by way of security for the credit facility provided by crediting the amount to the customer's account in anticipation of collection. If the drawer gives specific instructions for collection of bills through a particular agency, the Bank proceeds to do so. But where no such instructions are given the Bank collects the bills through one of its own branches or any other Bank of its choice. When the bills and documents are received and accepted by the Bank for collection, the Bank's customers are required to fill and sign a printed application form (Annexure 'A' and marked as Ex. P.-9) in which the blank space is provided for noting the agency through which the bills are to be routed. But the blank space in the form be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a reasonable time, and therefore, the Bank, on 12-4-1972. wrote to the Canara Banking Corporation. Semapur, making the necessary enquiry. But this letter was received back on 26-4-1972 with the remarks that the addressee had "left". The defendant Bank later on learnt that there was no such branch of the Canara Bank at semapur and that the registered covers were in fact delivered to one "Canara Banking" Corporation, Semapur, for whom one Ratanlal Agarwal signed as Manager and thus someone played fraud in receiving the documents as also in forging endorsement on the same and obtained the delivery of the 43 bales from the Carrier for which the Bank lodged a report with the police on 30-7-1972, but no action was taken. 8. In the aforementioned circumstances, the Bank pleaded justification in reversing the credit entry and contended that the plaintiff company was not entitled to the amount of the said bills. It also took the plea that the post office through which the documents were sent per registered post was not the agent of the defendant Bank but that of the plaintiff company. It has also been averred that it was a fraud committed by one Om Prakash and his Muni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etired by the drawee thereof, which are the factors against the concept of sale transactions as claimed by the plaintiff company. On these contentions, it was stressed that the defendant Bank was only a collecting agent for the plaintiff company and the credit given to the plaintiff after receiving the documents was by way of overdraft under the expectation that the documents will be honoured and retired by the drawee concerned. As against this, the learned counsel for the plaintiff/ respondent contended that under the Banking business practice the defendant Bank was purchaser of the title documents, epecially when the defendant Bank discounted the documents and gave credit of the amount of bills immediately after receiving the same and before the collection of amount from the drawee concerned. 11. Thus as seen above the main question centres round the controversy whether by accepting the relevant documents with endorsement in its favour and discounting the same by crediting the price thereof to the account of the plaintiff company immediately and before realising the same from the drawee concerned, the ownership in floods covered by the said documents passed on the defendant Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r by the customer for collection when due and to credit the amount in the account of the customer after the proceeds are actually collected, it is not a case of sale and purchase of negotiable instruments or documents of title relating to goods because these bills are merely handed over to the banker for collection and credit when received and the banker has no property in them. But the "Bills negotiated" or "Bills discounted" stand on a different footing by which the discounter is a holder for full value and gets absolute title over it, In this behalf a reference may be made to Sheldon's Practice and Law of Banking, Tenth Edition, at page 306, wherein the author has discussed that "to discount a bill" is to buy it, to become the transferee of it, by having it endorsed or transferred by delivery by the holder, giving him a price settled, either by agreement or by the current rate in the money market. It has been further stated that a discounter is a holder for full value and not a pledgee: he can deal and part with the bills as he likes, his title to the bill and to sue on it is absolute and covers the whole face value; he is in no sense a trustee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the bill or instrument is cleared, then the bank would be collecting the money not for the customer but chiefly for itself. From the above discussion, it is clear that if the bills and the relevant documents presented by its drawer are accepted by a banker with endorsement in its favour and the same are immediately discounted by the banker without waiting for its collection, by giving full credit for the entire amount of the document, so presented, the banker itself becomes a purchaser and the holder thereof for full value. But at page 226 in paragraph 421 itself in the Halsbury's Laws, it has been stated that whether the bill is taken from a customer for collection or as security or discounted for him, is a question of fact. We shall, therefore, advert to the evidence in this behalf. 17. Chimanlal (D. W. 1) was the Manager of the defendant Bank at the relevant time. He deposed in para 6 of his deposition that after receiving the documents duly endorsed in favour of the Bank, the value thereof is credited to the account of the customer and if the customer so desired he may withdraw the said amount from his account. He also admitted that the amount so credited is the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being in possession of the Bank, were not produced to prove the same, The evidence regarding the instructions alleged to have been given by the plaintiff for collection of the bills through a particular agency is neither satisfactory nor consistent. It is clear from the evidence of the defendant itself that the blank space in the application form, a copy of which is Ex. P-9, was left vacant by the plaintiff and it was not specified as to from which agency the bills had to be collected and it was thus left to the discretion of the Bank to select the agency of its own choice. The evidence of the Bank Manager, Chimanlal (D. W. 1) and Accountant Madhusudan (D. W. 3) that the instructions for collection through a particular agency were written in the Hundies given by the plaintiff could not be accepted for the simple reason that no such instructions are noted in the carbon copies of Hundies produced by the plaintiff. In the absence of any satisfactory and convincing evidence in this behalf, it has to be assumed that the defendant Bank adopted its own mode and choice of agency in sending the documents through the post office by registered post which were delivered to some wrong and unkno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
