Case Comment- State Bank of India v. Indexport Registered and ORS on 30 April, 1992

The present case overrules the decision of Union Bank of India vs. Manku Narayana , while discussing Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 where the liability of the surety is co-extensive with the principle debtor and the order of the judgement of the Manku Narayan' case and the overruling of that order with the present case State Bank Of India V. Indexport Registered and Ors. In which the court of law held that the decree holder can proceed against the surety even if he has not exhausted the remedy against the principle debtor or The creditor is not bound to exhaust his remedy against the principal before suing the surety, and a suit may be maintained against the surety though the principal has not been sued. With the use of Order 34 Rule 4 of Code of Civil Procedure, Order 34 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, Order 21 Rule 30 of Code of Civil Procedure, Indian Contract Act 1872 Section 128; Specific Relief Act 1963, Transfer of Property Act,1882 -Section 68. Bhanupriya Singh Markam"Case Comment- State Bank of India v. Indexport Registered and ORS on 30 April, 1992" Published in International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (ijtsrd), ISSN: 2456-6470, Volume-2 | Issue-5 , August 2018, URL: http://www.ijtsrd.com/papers/ijtsrd17078.pdf http://www.ijtsrd.com/management/law-and-management/17078/case-comment--state-bank-of-india-v-indexport-registered-and-ors-on-30-april-1992/bhanupriya-singh-markam