AMRIT LAL GOVERDHAN LALAN vs STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the entries in the Bank's account books were mere internal instructions and did not constitute a legally binding variation of the contract under Section 133 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Court clarified that a promise to give time under Section 135 requires a formal agreement or a new valid contract, and the Bank's actions did not discharge the appellant's liability. Additionally, the Court ruled that the loss of security did not absolve the appellant of liability under Section 141 as there was no consent for such loss.