LIABILITY OF COLLATERAL SECURITY

(An Examination)
LAW OF CONTRACTS I

Submitted by:
NAGA LAHARI
ROLL NO. 2013048
SEMESTER II

DAMODARAM SANJIVYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Vishakhapatnam
March 2014
1

CERTIFICATE
Title of the Subject: Law of Contracts I
Name of the Faculty: Dr. Aparup Pakhira

Particulars

Date and Signature of the Remarks

Faculty

Abstract
First consultation
Second consultation
Third

consultation

and

final submission

I, NAGA LAHARI, hereby declare that this project titled Liability of Collateral
security submitted by me, as a whole, is original works undertaken by me. I have duly
acknowledged almost all the sources from which the ideas and extracts have been taken.

(Signature of candidate)
Place: Visakhapatnam

Naga Lahari

Date:

Roll no. 2013048

Semester II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
2

I consider myself lucky that I got the chance to do a work on this topic that was to Liability
of Collateral Security.
I thank the subject teacher, Aparup Pakhira, for letting me choose the topic, Mrs. Savita
Pagnis and Dr. Lakshmipati Raju for suggesting and advising on the work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE
CERTIFICATE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Page number
02
03

1. INTRODUCTION
2. STATEMENT OF THE OBJECTIVE
3. HYPOTHESIS

05
05
06

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

06

5. MEANING OF LIABILITY OF COLLATERAL

SECURITY
6. DEFINITIONS OF COLLATERAL SECURITY

06

7.

METHODS OF PERFECTION AND COMMON

MISTAKES IN COLLATERAL SECURITY
8. ASSETS PLEDGED AS COLLATERAL FOR
LIABILITIES
9. SECTION. 138 IN THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT
ACT, 1881
10. JUDICIAL REVIEWS
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
DECLARATION

07

08
09
10
11
15
15
17

1. INTRODUCTION
4

Collateral is especially related to banking that traditionally refers to the secured lending
which is also known as asset-based lending. Recently, complex collateralization arrangements
are being used to secure the trade transactions, which are also known as capital market
collateralization. The collateral provided, acts as a security to the lender that assures them
that they will get their money back whether or not the borrowers are able to repay the loan
satisfactorily. The lender often presents unilateral obligations secured with them in the form
of, guarantee, property, surety or other movable or immovable things as collateral, which
originally and generally is denoted by the term security, whereas the lender often presents
obligations1 which are bilateral secured by extra liquid assets 2 such as cash that is also very
often known for margin.
The collateral is taken as a protection for the lender against the borrower's failure to repay the
loan. If a borrower fails to repay a loan, that borrowers right on the property pledged as
collateral ceases and the lender becomes the owner of the property.
2. STATEMENT OF THE OBJECTIVE
This research paper deals with the Liability of Collateral Security, which means financial,
security, interests, warranties etc., The research paper mainly deals with the agreements,
lendings, assets, companys liabilities. The research paper deals with liabilities relating to
qathe collateral and the factors which influence them and the important judicial approaches
related to the liabilities of collateral security.
3. HYPOTHESIS
The research paper deals with the importance of liabilities of collateral security in the
nationwide. The paper does not deal with the international collateral securities and their
liabilities. The paper deals with almost all the financial assets relating to the liabilities of the
collateral security and their importance explained with the help of judicial approaches.
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
1 It is a tie which binds us to pay or to do something agreeably to the laws and
customs of the country in which the obligation is made.
2 Property that can be quickly and easily converted into cash such as bonds and
assets in a bank that is convertible into cash.
5

4.1.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This paper deals with the liabilities of collateral security in the nationwide and also the
factors which influence them.
4.2.

SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This paper deals with the key functions and importance of liabilities of the collateral security
and their importance.
4.3.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What is the meaning of Liability of Collateral Security?

What are the definitions of the Collateral security?

What are the basic perfection methods of Collateral Security and Common Mistakes?

What are the membership interests in a limited liability company as Collateral?

What are the assets pledged as collateral for liabilities?

4.4.

SOURCES OF DATA

The primary source of data is from internet sources.

5. MEANING OF LIABILITY OF COLLTERAL SECURITY
The meaning of liability is responsibility, which means the state of one who is bound in law
and justice to do something which may be enforced by action 3. This liability may arise from
contracts either express or implied, or in consequence of torts committed. The another
meaning of liability is, the liabilities of one man are not in general transferred to his
representatives further than to reach the estate of person hands. For example, an executor is
not the person, responsible for the liabilities of his testator which has come to his hands. The
word collateral was derived from the Latin word collateral which has two meanings. The one
3 LawGuide v 1.6 (http://market.android.com/search?
9q=pname:com.quoord.lawGuide)
6

is a side; that which is sideways and not direct and the other, property guaranteeing payment
of a secured debt. The meaning of security is that which renders a matter sure; an instrument
which renders certain the performance of the contract. The term also sometimes applied 4 to
designate the person, who becomes the surety for another person, or the person who engages
for the performance of anothers contract. Now the meaning of collateral security, which
means, in a Contract, a separate obligation which attached to the another contract, to guaranty
the performance of a contract. By the term, also meant the transfer of property or of any
other contracts to insure the performance of a collateral engagement. The property or the
securities, which conveyed are also called as collateral securities.
6. DEFINITIONS OF COLLATERAL SECURITY
Collateral Security is defined as the Property or any other assets which a borrower offers the
lender to secure a loan. If, the borrower stops of making the promised loan payments of
secured loan, then the lender can seize the collateral to the recoup of its losses. Because, the
collateral offers the sum of security to the lender in the case, which the borrower fails to pay
the loan back, loans which are secured by any collateral, typically have the lower interest
rates than the unsecured loans. A lenders claim to the borrowers collateral is called as a lien.
Investopedia5 explains the Collateral as, if you get any mortgage, the collateral would be your
house. If you stop making any of your monthly base house payments, the lender can also take
the possession of the house through a process called as a foreclosure and can sell it to get
back to the principal which it lent you. In the margin trading, the securities in the account of a
person act as a collateral in any case of a margin call. Similarly, if you have to stop the
making of payments on any auto loan, the lender would seize the vehicle of the person. When
you borrow some money with a credit card, however, there would be no collateral, so the
credit card, debt will carry a high interest rate than the mortgage debt or any auto loan debt.
Collateral security6 is defined as a separate obligation which attached to any other contract, to
guaranty the specific performance of the contract. By the of term, collateral also meant to be
4 Id
5 Collateral Security, available on
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/collateral.asp, last visited on 16th February,
2014.
7

the transfer of the property or of any other contracts, which to insure the performance of a
any principal engagement? The property or securities thus conveyed are also called collateral
securities.

7. METHODS OF PERFECTION AND COMMON MISTAKES IN

COLLATERAL SECURITY
In connection with any secured or the any financing, the secured party's counsel should first
determine what type of collateral; the person is dealing with in order to determine how
perfect its security interest7 in any such collateral. Unlike corporate stock8, the equity of
interests in an alternative entity may not always be the same type of collateral for purposes of
the UCC(Uniform commercial code). Equity of interests in limited liability companies and
the partnerships can be a "general intangible" or "investment property." Unless the alternative
entity has been taken an affirmative steps to have its own equity interests treated as
"securities" for purposes of Article 8 of the UCC Act, any such equity interests will probably
as general intangibles. Thus, a secured party must review the alternative entities governing
both the documents and also the certificate of interest, if there is any, to determine if the
subject of any substituting entity has been chosen in Article 8 to have its own equitable
interests, treated as securities, in which case, such interests will be an investment collateral,
but not general intangibles.
Once, the secured party's counsel has to be determined, by what type of collateral the equity
interests are of UCC purposes, and then the person can determine how to perfect the secured
party's security interest in the any collateral security. If any equity interests are general
intangibles, the sole method of perfection is by the method of filing. Therefore, if the equity
6 Collateral Security, available on http://legaldictionary.thefreedictionary.com/collateral+security, last visited on 16th February,
2014.
7
8 Methods and Common mistakes, available on
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/blt/2013/01/01haskins.html, last visited
on 16th February, 2014.
8

of interests is general intangibles, for the priority purposes, the familiar rules of first to file
will govern the multiple interests in any equity interests. To the extent of the equity interests
are "securities," and therefore "investment property," the then secured party's counsel should
determine, whether such interests are "certificated securities" or an "uncertificated securities."
The common mistakes in collateral security are to recap briefly, equity interests in all the
alternative entities be "investment property" or the "general intangibles" and also the nature
of the collateral will always determine, the permissible of collateral in methods of perfection.
This seems relatively simple, but lets briefly describe some of the common mistakes in
collateral that the practitioners always make in dealings with this kind of collateral. As, an
premise it is imperative that the practitioner appreciate the person does not deal with the
corporate stock and hence what might apply to the corporate stock, which will not apply in
the world of any other alternative entities. Thus, it will not be sufficient, just to simplify and
also to follow the same procedures that any such practitioner has should follow to be a perfect
interest in any corporate stock. For example, under Delaware law, in contrast with corporate
stock, the equity interest in a limited liability of a partnership or a limited liability of a
company is made up of, such a distinct economic rights and should governance rights, and
the two sets of rights should not bound together by any statute. Ultimately, a secured party
wants to have right, upon the default, also to take control of the equity interests, and should
have the ability to receive, or transfer, the economic benefits of any equity interest as well as
to governance the rights. Thus, it is critical for any secured party to describe any collateral
and to ensure that, the collateral description is always broad enough to create any security
interest in the fields of economic and also to govern rights.
The second mistake we see often is a failure to be perfect, the any security interest in any
manner, which provides the secured party with any priority over the other secured parties
with a equal competing security interest in the liability of a collateral. Some of the great
benefits of which are revised in Article 9 are the self-help remedies that enable the secured
party to take any number of actions, without any judicial assistance to realize the value of its
collateral in order and also to satisfy the obligations, which are secured by the security
interest9.

9 Id
9

Thus, as described below, the any secured party will definitely want to make sure that the
security agreement and also the entity's governing documents, which contains the necessary
protections to allow the secured parties too effectively and efficiently, to exercise the selfhelp remedies, which are available to a secured party under the act of UCC.
8. ASSETS PLEDGED AS COLLATERAL FOR LIABILITIES
The assets pledged as collateral for liabilities are liabilities from negative valuation of
financial instruments10, bank deposit guarantee fund; guarantee fund for the settlement of
stock exchange transactions, collateral required as guarantee of loan repayment which is
given in security for a loan is to secure repayment to the creditor. In housing loans, the
collateral is usually the residential property being purchased, guarantors liability for a loan
according to the collateral agreement, pledges property as security for a loan, the bank has an
obligation to provide information to guarantor.
Before committing to act as a guarantor or give a pledge, one should verify the following:
Verify from the debtor his/her financial position 11, clarify the content and scope of the
guarantee or pledge agreement, make sure that all unclear points are cleared up before you
sign the agreement, if you are liable only for a portion of the debt or only for a certain period,
make sure that these conditions are documented in the agreement, be sure you receive your
own copies of the guarantee or pledge is given. Keep them in a safe place always be prepared
for the possibility that you may become liable for the commitment you have undertaken.
9. SECTION 138 IN THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881
This is the important section in the Negotiable instrument Act, which is related to the
liabilities of collateral security, collateral and any financial issues. The section 138 of the Act
follows here:
10 Assets pledged for collateral as liabilities, available on
http://www.pkobp.pl/raportroczny 2012/en/assets-pledged-as-collateral-forliabilities.html, last visited on 16th February, 2014 .
11Assets pledged for collateral as securities, available on
http://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/financial_customer/Financial_products/Loan/Guarantees_and_pledges/pages/Default.aspx
10

Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, of funds in the account. Where any cheque drawn by a
person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money
to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt
or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid. either because of the amount of money
standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the
amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such
person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice. To any
other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
one year, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both:
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless(a)The cheque has been, presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on
which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier;
(b) The payee or the holder in due course of the cheque as the case may be, makes a demand
for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice, in writing, to the drawer of
the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding
the return of the cheque as unpaid; and
(c) The drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the
payee to the holder in due course of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of the said
notice. Explanation.- For the purposes of this section," debt or other liability" means a legally
enforceable debt or other liability.
10. JUDICIAL REVIEWS
10.1. NISHANT AGGARWAL V. KAILASH KUMAR SHARMA12
The appellant herein is the Director of M/s Byrni Steel Private Limited and his father Mr.
B.L. Aggarwal is the Managing Director of M/s Mechfeb Engineering Industries Private
Limited situated at Meghalaya and Guwahati. The respondent was associated with both the
abovementioned firms as he used to bring business from various private firms and
Government Departments on commission basis. During the course of business, the appellant
herein issued a post- dated cheque bearing No. 925504 dated 01.08.2009 drawn on Standard
Chartered Bank, Guwahati, for Rs. 28,62,700/- in favour of the complainant- respondent
herein in order to discharge his legal enforceable liabilities. Vide letter dated 21.01.2006, the
appellant informed the Branch Manager, Standard Chartered Bank, Guwahati, as well as the
officer in-charge, Dispur Police Station, Guwahati regarding missing of the said cheque.
12 Criminal appeal No. 808 of 2013 arising out of S.L.P. (CRL.) NO. 9434 of 2011
11

Thereafter, on 28.03.2008, the appellant wrote a letter to the Standard Chartered Bank for
stop payment of the said cheque as the same was missing.
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, by order dated 15.06.2010, in C.R. No.
340 of 2010, issued bailable warrants against the respondent. Thereafter, on 06.08.2010, the
respondent filed an application for recall of the bailable warrants issued against him.
Ultimately, learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani, vide order dated 05.03.2011, accepted the
application with the observation that the Court at Bhiwani has no jurisdiction and the
complaint was returned for presentation before the proper Court having jurisdiction.
Dissatisfied with the order dated 05.03.2011, the respondent filed Criminal Revision Petition
being No. 35 of 2011 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge IV, Bihwani. By order
dated 12.05.2011, the Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order of the Judicial Magistrate,
Bhiwani and allowed the revision. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant herein filed Crl.
Misc. No. M-32542 of 2011 before the High Court. The High Court, by impugned order
dated 31.10.2011, dismissed the petition. Against the said order, the appellant has preferred
this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.

10.2. YOGENDRA PRATAP SINGH V. SAVITRI PANDEY & ANR13

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against
respondent No.1 Smt. Savitri Pandey in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Magistrate,
Sonbhadra in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The respondents case was that four cheques issued
by the accused-respondent in his favour were dishonoured, when presented for encashment.
A notice calling upon the respondent-drawer of the cheque to pay the amount covered by the
cheques was issued and duly served upon the respondent as required under Section 138 (c) of
The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. No payment was, however, made by the accused till
7th October, 2008 when a complaint under Section 138 of the Act aforementioned was filed
before the Magistrate. Significantly enough the notice in question having been served on 23rd
September, 2008, the complaint presented on 7th October, 2008 was filed before expiry of the
stipulated period of 15 days.

13 Criminal appeal No. of 2012 arising out of SLP (CRL.) N0. 5761 of 2010
12

The Magistrate all the same took cognizance of the offence on 14th October, 2008 and issued
summons to the accused, who then assailed the said order in a petition under Section 482 of
the Criminal procedure code. before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The High
court took the view that since the complaint had been filed within 15 days of the service of
the notice the same was clearly premature and the order passed by the Magistrate taking
cognizance of the offence on the basis of such a complaint is legally bad. The High Court
accordingly quashed the complaint and the entire proceedings relating hereto in terms of its
order impugned in the present appeal.
10.3. COAL MINES P.F. COMMISSIONER THROUGH BOARD OF TRUSTEES V.
RAMESH CHANDRA JHA14
The appellant herein is the Coal Mines Provident Fund Commissioner through the Board of
Trustees, constituted under Section 3 of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous
Provisions Act, CMPF Organisation, Dhanbad. The Respondent was appointed as a Lower
Division Clerk on 16th January, 1967, by the Chief Commissioner in the service of the Coal
Mines Provident Fund Organisation, hereinafter referred to as `CMPFO'. In connection with
the forcible occupation of a Type III quarter, a departmental proceeding was commenced
against the Respondent and on 16th March, 1979, on being found guilty of the charge framed
against him, the Respondent was removed from service.
Challenging his removal from service, the Respondent filed Title Suit No.78 of 1979 in the
Court of Munsif at Dhanbad. Simultaneously, the Respondent also filed an appeal before the
Appellate Authority under Regulation 37 of the Staff Regulations, which was dismissed on
4th March, 1980. Meanwhile, in the suit, the learned Munsif, Dhanbad (Jharkhand) framed a
preliminary issue in Suit No.78 of 1979 as to whether in the absence of notice under Section
80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the suit was maintainable?
Aggrieved by the said order, the Respondent filed Civil Revision No.341 of 1980(R) in the
Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court, which held that since the Appellant was not a "public
officer" as defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, no notice under Section 80 was required to
be served upon him before the suit was filed.By its order dated 7th September, 1981, the
Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court set aside the findings of the learned Munsif and held
14 Civil Appeal No. 41 of 2012 Arising out of SLP No. 5827 of 2011
13

the suit to be maintainable. The Appellant, thereafter, brought the matter to this Court and in
Civil Appeal No.1932 of 1982 this Court by its judgment dated 31st January, 1990, reversed
the finding of the Appellate Authority upon holding that the Coal Mines Provident Fund
Commissioner is a "public officer" within the meaning of Section 2(17) of the aforesaid
Code.
It was, therefore, settled upto this Court that the Appellant herein was a public officer and that
notice under Section 80 was required to be given to him before the suit was filed by the
Respondent.
10.4. KHANAPURAM GANDAIAH V. ADMISTRATIVE OFFICER & ORS15.
The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner claimed to be in
exclusive possession of the land in respect of which civil suit No.854 of 2002 was filed
before Additional Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District praying for perpetual injunction by Dr.
Mallikarjina Rao against the petitioner and another, from entering into the suit land.
Being aggrieved, the plaintiff therein preferred CMA No.185 of 2002 and the same was also
dismissed. Two other suits were filed in respect of the same property impleading the
Petitioner also as the defendant. In one of the suits i.e. O.S. No.875 of 2003, the Trial Court
granted temporary injunction against the Petitioner. Being aggrieved, Petitioner preferred the
CMA No.67 of 2005, which was dismissed by the Appellate Court - Respondent No.4 vide
order dated 10.8.2006.
The petitioner challenged the said order before the High Court, seeking a direction to the
Respondent No.1 to furnish the information as under what circumstances the Respondent
No.4 had passed the Judicial Order dismissing the appeal against the interim relief granted by
the Trial Court. The Respondent No.4 had been impleaded as respondent by name.
The Writ Petition had been dismissed by the High Court on the grounds that the information
sought by the petitioner cannot be asked for under the RTI Act. Thus, the application was not
maintainable. More so, the judicial officers are protected by the Judicial Officers' Protection
Act, 1850 (hereinafter called the "Act 1850").
Mr. V. Kanagaraj, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that
right to information is a fundamental right of every citizen. The RTI Act does not provide for
15 (2010) IN SC 1 (4th January 2010)
14

any special protection to the Judges, thus petitioner has a right to know the reasons as to how
the Respondent No. 4 has decided his appeal in a particular manner. Therefore, the
application filed by the petitioner was maintainable. Rejection of the application by the
Respondent No. 1 and Appellate authorities rendered the petitioner remediless. Petitioner
vide application dated 15.11.2006 had asked 4 as under what circumstances the Respondent
No.4 ignored the written arguments and additional written arguments, as the ignorance of the
same tantamount to judicial dishonesty, the Respondent No.4 omitted to examine the
fabricated documents filed by the plaintiff; and for what reason the respondent no.4 omitted
to examine the documents filed by the petitioner.
10.5. STATE OF PUNJAB V. BALWINDER SINGH AND ORS16.
On 30.10.1992, one Dhian Singh-the Complainant (PW-3), after attending the last rites of one
of his relatives at Village Mustabad, Amritsar was returning to Batala along with his family
members in a Jhang Transport Bus bearing No. PB-02-D-9485. The bus was being driven at a
very high speed by the driver-Respondent No. 1 herein.
When the aforesaid bus reached the bus stand at Mudhal, at that time, a truck bearing No. PB02-C-9665 which was being driven by Respondent No. 2 herein was coming from the
opposite side at a very high speed. Both the drivers were driving their vehicle at a very high
speed and in rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, both the vehicles collided with
each other and two passengers, namely, Darshan Singh s/o Bela Singh and Banso w/o Ajit
Singh died at the spot. The other passengers, namely, Sonia, Dalbir Singh and Ramandeep
were taken to the Civil Hospital but later on the succumbed to their injuries.
The Judicial Magistrate, by order dated 14.12.1998, convicted both the accused persons and
directed them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years each for the offence under
Section 304A and to pay fine of Rs. 200/- each, in default, to further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for two months and to also undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six
months each for the offence punishable under Sections 337 and 279 IPC.
CONCLUSION

16 Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Criminal Appeal Nos. 47-48 of 2012 arising out
of S.L.P. (CRL.) No. 7872-7873 of 2010
15

As the use of alternative entities increases, it is incumbent upon commercial finance attorneys
to understand the characteristics of such interests and to ensure that they understand how to
perfect such collateral, and otherwise deal with such collateral. Due to the flexibility of many
of the alternative entity statutes and the contractual freedom available to the parties
hereunder, care should be taken to ensure that a secured party sufficiently protects its security
interest by taking some of, or at least considering, the actions described above. As stated at
the beginning, the most important step in this process is to recognize that equity interests in
alternative entities are not exactly like corporate stock and the approach by a secured party to
protect its security interest in such collateral should be markedly different.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Collateral security, Available at http://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.-php?
go=2012/january/7.php last viewed on 18th February, 2014 at 05:00 PM
Collateral security, Available at http://legaldictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Collateral+security last viewed on 18th February, 2014 at 5:07 PM
Common mistakes and perfection of methods in collateral security Available at http://www.americanbar.org/publications/blt/2013/01/01_haskins.html last viewed on 18th February, 2014
at 5:15 PM
Assets pledged for collateral security Available at http://aj-law.com/2010/11/membershipinterests-in-a-limited-liability-company-as-collateral/ last viewed on 18th February, 2014 at
5:31 PM
Assets pledged for collateral security Available at http://www.pkobp.pl/raportroczny2012/en/assets-pledged-as-collateral-for-liabilities.html last viewed on 18th February, 2014
at 5:47 PM
Assets pledged for collateral security Available at http://www.finanssivalvonta.fi/en/Financial_customer/Financial_products/Loans/Guarantees_and_pledges/Pages/Default.aspx last
viewed on 18th February, 2014 at 5:15 PM
Section 138 of Negotiable instruments Act Available at http://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=2012/january/7.php last viewed on 19th February, 2014 at 5:17
PM

16

DECLARATION

I, NAGA LAHARI, Roll No.- 2013048, do hereby declare that this project titled
LIABILITY OF COLLATERAL SECURITY Submitted by me is my original research
work. I undertake to face all consequence/s if any part of this project is found copied from
any other source/s that leads to copyright infringement. Unauthorised access or making
illegal copy of this research work may entail strict legal action.

17