N.M.N. Duraiswami Chettiar v Dindigul Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd
AIR 1957 Mad 74519561 min read
The case in brief30-second read
- Facts
- The bank held a deposit to which rival claims were made, and it brought an interpleader suit. It was contended that the bank stood in the position of an agent of the depositor and was therefore barred by O.XXXV R.5.
- Issue
- Whether a bank holding a deposit can maintain an interpleader suit, or whether O.XXXV R.5 bars it.
- Held
- The relationship between a banker and a depositor is that of debtor and creditor, not principal and agent. O.XXXV R.5 therefore did not apply, and the interpleader suit was maintainable.
- Principle
- A bank, as debtor of its depositor, may file an interpleader suit about rival claims to a deposit.
Facts
- The bank held a deposit to which rival claims were made, and it brought an interpleader suit. It was contended that the bank stood in the position of an agent of the depositor and was therefore barred by O.XXXV R.5.
Issue
- Whether a bank holding a deposit can maintain an interpleader suit, or whether O.XXXV R.5 bars it.
Held
- The relationship between a banker and a depositor is that of debtor and creditor, not principal and agent. O.XXXV R.5 therefore did not apply, and the interpleader suit was maintainable.
Cite this
Citation
N.M.N. Duraiswami Chettiar v Dindigul Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd AIR 1957 Mad 745Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1070898/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.