Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Monday, 10 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-04-20 allowed

Canara Bank vs N.G. Subbaraya Setty & Anr

Bench: 2 — R.F. Nariman

In Brief

Canara Bank assigned a trademark "EENADU" to a borrower who defaulted on a loan, but later cancelled the assignment claiming it violated banking law. The borrower sued for damages. The trial court upheld the assignment as valid. Bank appealed, arguing the assignment breached the Banking Regulation Act (banks cannot trade in goods or earn royalties) and Trade Marks Act (unregistered assignments cannot be used as evidence). The Supreme Court held that a judgment upholding a transaction prohibited by law cannot bind parties in subsequent suits through res judicata doctrine. The Court set aside the lower courts' judgments and dismissed the borrower's claims, finding the assignment violated Sections 6, 8 of the Banking Regulation Act and Section 45(2) of the Trade Marks Act.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Res Judicata Banking Regulation Trademark Law Statutory Prohibition Evidence

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login