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

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more