Skip to main content

Banks Can Retain Pledged Gold Till All Dues are Cleared: HC

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that gold pledged for loan could be retained  by a bank even if the loan is repaid, when the customer has another loan is pending with the same bank. However, the court made it clear that banker’s lien will not apply to gold entrusted to the bank for safe custody in a locker.

Justice V Chithambaresh passed the order while disposing of a petition filed by Nakulan, of Kollam, seeking a directive to Canara Bank to release the gold ornaments pledged on the petitioner clearing only the gold loan. He said that he had taken a personal loan of `25,000 in January 2012. No security of any sort was obtained at the time of transaction.

He also availed a gold loan of Rs. 85,000 in May 2012 by pledging 46.7 grams of gold. The petitioner said that he was willing to clear the gold loan in its entirety and so, the bank is bound to release the gold ornaments without retaining them as security for the personal loan. However, the bank submitted that the gold ornaments cannot be released without the petitioner discharging the entire liability. The bank relied on section 171 of the Indian Contract Act to exercise its right of lien and retain as security the gold ornaments pledged for the amount due from the petitioner.

The court held that a bank has a general lien over all forms of security, including gold ornaments, deposited by or on behalf of the borrower in the ordinary course of banking business for the balance due from him. The bank has a further right to sell the securities, like the gold ornaments, and utilise the proceeds in discharge of the liability due from the borrower in respect of other loans.

The court further permitted the petitioner to repay the amount due towards the personal loan in six equal monthly instalments, in which event the sale of the gold shall be deferred.

Article referred: http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Banks-Can-Retain-Pledged-Gold-Till-All-Dues-are-Cleared-HC/2014/01/09/article1990749.ece

Comments

Most viewed this month

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...