CA Foundation |Business Laws |Bailment & Pledge |Jan/June 2025 | Revision| CA CS Yogita Harjani

[@muralimohan8230]

Thank you so much madam This may 23 my exams going on ,it's very helpful 👍

[@husnabathul5842]

tq u so much mam excellently understood

[@nikhilmk6626]

ma'am pls upload NI ACT 1881

[@susharthvlogs4552]

hmm

[@savithabaliga1189]

Thank you so much Indigolearn for providing the whole Fastrack course for free on KZbin. Helps a lot in revising frm the module. Quality of the lecs is just amazing. Best Law teacher @CA CS Yogita Harjani

[@prativadas7396]

Mam also uploaded indemnity

[@prativadas7396]

Mam can also uploaded sales of goods act 1930

[@prativadas7396]

Mam can I write this same way in my exam?

[@prativadas7396]

Mam please upload partnership act

[@bharathrock123]

Sir, plz upload Imp chapters from Company law also

[@1fin]

Hi, they are already there - few are left, will be uploaded soon. Check the playlist here - do share with your friends. kzbin.info/aero/PLZxYccUQ8mBT4rotz78HuWuyCxZuPnYLT

[@shashi8]

@@1fin is there any playlist like this for P3 Costing if Yes Send me link please

[@m.k.sivakumar5655]

Below question asked in icai January 2021 exam. as per the provision bank decision is valid but in icai suggest answer say invalid Radheshyam borrowed a sum of ` 50,000 from a Bank on the security of gold on 1.07.2019 under an agreement which contains a clause that the bank shall have a right of particular lien on the gold pledged with it. Radheshyam thereafter took an unsecured loan of ` 20,000 from the same bank on 1.08.2019 for three months. On 30.09.2019 he repaid entire secured loan of ` 50,000 and requested the bank to release the gold pledged with it. The Bank decided to continue the lien on the gold until the unsecured loan is fully repaid by Radheshyam. Decide whether the decision of the Bank is valid within the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 ?

[@CACSYogitaHarjani]

Bank's decision is valid as per section 171 and illustration mentioned in study material provided we mention the assumption that there is no contract to contrary. The provision says "in the absense of contract to the contrary, bank can retain security for general balance of account". Suggested answer might have taken the contrary assumption.

[@m.k.sivakumar5655]

@@CACSYogitaHarjani thank you ma'am