Skip to content


T.R. Gopalasami Pillai Vs. Si. Ru. Pe. KA. Chidambaram - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1916Mad619(1); 29Ind.Cas.151
AppellantT.R. Gopalasami Pillai
RespondentSi. Ru. Pe. KA. Chidambaram
Cases Referred and Goculdas Madhavji v. Narsu Yenkuji
Excerpt:
contract act (ix of 1872), section 56 - sub--contract--principal contract, cancellation of--effect on sub-contract. - 1. the learned judge is right. inder pershad singh v. campbell 7 c.p 474 : 8 g.l.e. 501 and goculdas madhavji v. narsu yenkuji 13 b.p 630 show that where a sub-lease is entered into in the belief that the original contract will be subsisting during the period during which the sub-contract is to be worked, the cancellation of the contract terminates the sub-contract as well: we think that proposition is unobjectionable. the plaintiff has recovered on the principle of quantum meruil for what he has done. the suit was rightly dismissed.2. the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

1. The learned Judge is right. Inder Pershad Singh v. Campbell 7 C.P 474 : 8 G.L.E. 501 and Goculdas Madhavji v. Narsu Yenkuji 13 B.P 630 show that where a sub-lease is entered into in the belief that the original contract will be subsisting during the period during which the sub-contract is to be worked, the cancellation of the contract terminates the sub-contract as well: we think that proposition is unobjectionable. The plaintiff has recovered on the principle of quantum meruil for what he has done. The suit was rightly dismissed.

2. The appeal is dismissed with costs.


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