Skip to content


Narasinga Pillai Vs. Muthusami Naickar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectContract
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1897)7MLJ218
AppellantNarasinga Pillai
RespondentMuthusami Naickar
Excerpt:
- .....aside the decree of the district munsif and decree the amount sued for with costs and interest at six per cent, per annum from the date of the plaint till date of payment. defendant must pay the costs in this court.....
Judgment:

1. We cannot accept the contention that the bond was executed to Nizamudeen as agent alone, for he was entitled to a portion of the rent himself as a co-sharer and a contract with him by the defendant for consideration appearing on the document, e.g. the giving of time for payment is valid and binding even though given at a time when his authority to act as agent for his co-sharers had in fact been determined. No notice of such determination is alleged to have been given to defendant who is protected by Section 208; Contract Act, from any possible claim by the other co-sharers for the rent due to them.

2. The plaintiff as the assignee of the bond is therefore entitled to recover the amount due.

3. We must set aside the decree of the District Munsif and decree the amount sued for with costs and interest at six per cent, per annum from the date of the plaint till date of payment. Defendant must pay the costs in this Court also.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //