Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Year: 1966 Page 1 of about 701 results (0.116 seconds)

Sep 05 1966 (SC)

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kaluram

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-05-1966

Reported in : AIR1967SC1105; 1967(0)BLJR313; 1967MhLJ497(SC); [1967]1SCR266

..... the forest contractor. the surety kaluram contends that because the state lost or parted with the security he stood discharged. by s. 140 of the indian contract act, 1872, where a guaranteed debt has become due, or default of the principal debtor to perform a guaranteed duty has taken place, the surety, upon payment ..... condition as they formerly stood in his hands.'' subject to certain variations, which are not material for the matter under discussion, s. 141 of the contract act incorporates the rule of english law relating to the discharge from liability of a surety when the creditor parts with or loses the security held by him ..... agent. by r. 13 the forest contractor is required to remove forest produce only by the route or routes specified by rules under the act, or by his forest contract, and to take all forest produce removed by him to such depots or places as may be similarly prescribed, for check and examination. ..... removal of goods sold until the price was paid : that right was lost. the right conferred by s. 83 of the forest act and under the terms of the contract to prevent removal and right to sell goods for non-payment of the price, coupled with the charge on the goods constituted the ..... , and that those rules, shall be deemed to be binding on every forest contractor not only as rules made under the forest act, but also as conditions of his forest contract. by r. 6 the forest contractor is required to carry with him an 'accessory licence' entitling him and his servants and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1966 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Lal Chand and Sons and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-20-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Cal310

..... has been referred to at the bar, though i do not see its relevance in the context of facts here. 22. i now reach section 72 of the contract act 1872 which, as the law now is, in view of the decisions of the highest authority, mr. chakravarti relies upon, such as shiba prasad singh v. srish ..... other against sree saraswaty press ltd. on september 12, 1963. the ground on which such reversal rests is absence of a mistake within section 72 of the contract act 1872. 9. this is why the union of india has come up to this court in revision. 10. that the transactions of the type these two litigations ..... for sales-tax having been an unauthorized one, violated as such a contract has section 175, sub-section (3), of the government of india act 1935 (25 and 26 geo. 5 ch. 42). the controversy is also about section 72 of the contract act 1872 doing any duty in all circumstances here. 12. on the question of ..... (3) of the government of india act 1935. 21. i now turn to the other matter in controversy. section 70 of the contract act 1872 does not do any duty here. it does not, because what is seen here is a contract--be it continuation of the original contract or a supplementary contract. so soon as that is said, ..... the validity of a contract, the like of which is to be seen here, it is now firmly established that the provisions of section 175, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1966 (HC)

Dharam Vir Vs. Jagan Nath and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-04-1966

Reported in : AIR1968P& H84

..... question arising in this case. that decision gives effect to the principle laid down in section 42 onwards of the indian contract act, 1872. these sections vary the rules of english common law as to the devolution of the benefit of and liability in respect of joint ..... taking accounts effect can be given to the document qua other partners. that, as i have already said, will require re-writing of the entire contract and compelling the major partners to do something contrary to the express terms thereof. the court will then have to say that each major partner' ..... dismissed. the additional senior subordinate judge, delhi, by his judgment dated 13th february, 1957, allowed the appeal filed by dharam vir and decided that the contract of partnership could not be treated as void in so far as the parties other than the minor were concerned. the suit was, therefore, remanded to ..... parties? 2. whether the plaintiff is estopped from bringing the present suit? 3 whether the suit does not disclose any cause of action4 whether the partnership contract has already been held to be void and unenforceable? if so, with what effect?' 3. issue no. 4 was decided against the plaintiff and the ..... before the court trying that suit a preliminary objection was raised by the contesting defendants that since a minor could not enter into any contract of partnership the contract was void and unenforceable this objection prevailed with the trial court which rejected the plaint by its order dated 25th january 1952 an appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 1966 (SC)

Superintendent and Legal Remembrancer, State of West Bengal Vs. Corpor ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-07-1966

Reported in : AIR1967SC997; 1967CriLJ950; [1967]2SCR170

..... of the indian legislation proceeds upon the assumption that the government will be bound unless the contrary is stated. many acts like the code of civil procedure, 1908 and the indian contract act 1872 make special provisions for the government in respect of particular matters on the assumption that in respect of all other ..... matters the government will be bound by the general provisions of the act. the indian limitation act 1882 provided a special period of limitation ..... presumption but only on express exemptions, see, for instance, s. 74 of the contract act, s. 9 of the specific relief act, s. 90 of the indian registration act, s. 2(a) and (b) of the indian easements act, the crown grants act xv of 1895, ss. 295 (proviso), 356(b) and 411 and 616 ( ..... high court. in the courts in the mufassal, the civil courts acts e.g. bengal, agra and assam civil courts act, 1887 s. 37; the punjab laws act, 1872, s. 5; the central provinces laws act, 1875, ss. 5, 6; the oudh laws act, 1876, s. 3. require the courts to decide cases according to ..... actions against the indian inhabitants of the town in matters of succession and inheri- tance to lands, rents, goods, and in all matters of contract and dealing between party and party, their personal law if both parties belonged to the same community, and by the law and usages of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1966 (HC)

S. Doraiswami Mudaliar Vs. Balasubramaniam and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-05-1966

Reported in : AIR1968Mad94

..... concerned societies may be referred to in this connection. sec. 17(1) provides--'17(1) subject to the provisions of s. 18--(a) any individual competent to contract under s. 11 of the indian contract act, 1872, (b) any other registered society, (c) the government, and (d) any body of person whether incorporated or not and whether or not established by or under any ..... act, 1961 (act 53 of 1961) provides--'1. no person shall be eligible for being elected or appointed as a member of a committee if he......... (a)........... (b) (i) is in default to ..... society, it cannot be contended that a default by a society would not be a disqualification for being elected to another society.(3) a perusal of several sections of the act, the byelaws of the conjeevaram co-operative central bank and the uthukottai co-operative supervising union makes it clear that the disqualification is also attached to the registered co-operative ..... ' to the conjeevaram co-operative central bank. the rejection of the nomination of the petitioner is challenged as illegal and contrary to the provisions of the madras co-operative societies act, 1961, and the rules and by-laws of the conjeevaram co-operative supervising union and the kollanur co-operative credit society. sec. 28(1) of the madras co-operative societies .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1966 (HC)

Rani Annapurnabai Vs. Court of Wards Through the Collector, Nagpur and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-27-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Bom394; (1967)69BOMLR490; 1967MhLJ450

..... or interest in, his property or any part thereof; (ii) he is incompetent to enter any contract which may involve him in pecuniary liability; (iii) his property is not liable under section 68 of the indian contract act, 1872; (iv) no suit shall be brought in any civil court to charge any person upon any promise ..... made after he has ceased to be a government ward to pay any debt or discharge any liability under section 68 of the indian contract act; and (v) the government ward ..... cannot ratify any contract made during the period as government ward after he has ceased to be a ward, whether it is or is not for ..... being a government ward, whose property is under the superintendence of the court of wards. the right of dealing with this property or to make any contract involving a pecuniary liability is altogether taken away in respect of such a government ward. similarly, no suit can be filed relating to the person ..... consideration. the government ward is free to enter into a contract of marriage but again, not a contract, which will involve any pecuniary liability. under section 32 no government ward can make an adoption, unless a permission in writing is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 15 1966 (SC)

K.P. Chowdhary Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-15-1966

Reported in : AIR1967SC203; [1966]3SCR919

..... and it was held that it should be confined to its own facts in the context of the representation of the people act. finally it was held in that case that s. 70 of the indian contract act (no. 9 of 1872) could be invoked against the government if the person invoking it could show that he had ..... acted lawfully and had not intended to act gratuitously and the state had enjoyed the benefit. 9. lastly this court had occasion to consider the ..... by this court inseth bikhrai jaipuria v. union of india : [1962]2scr880 . it was again emphasised that s. 175(3) of the government of india act, 1935, required that a contract, if it was to bind the government, had (a) to be expressed to be made by the governor or governor general, (b) to be executed ..... the case and contended that recovery of the amount could be effected as arrears of land revenue under s. 82 of the indian act read with rules 28 and 29 of the forest contract rules in view of the conditions of auction, which the appellant had accepted. 4. the petition was heard finally by a full ..... -state for recovery of the deficiency on re-sale was not covered by either s. 82 of the indian forest act, (no. 16 of 1927) or rules 28 and 29 of the madhya pradesh forest contract rules or under any other provision of the law, and the amount therefore could not be recovered as arrears of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 1966 (HC)

C. Satyanarayana and ors. Vs. Kanumarlapudi Lakshmi Narasimham

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-29-1966

Reported in : AIR1968AP330

..... to madras jurisdiction' is printed, it cannot become a part of the contract unless it is expressly agreed to by the plaintiff. the lower courts have categorically round that 'subject to madras jurisdiction' was not a term of the ..... transaction that any dispute arising out of the transaction would be heard and decided by a particular court. no single party can impose any term of the contract upon the other, unless it is agreed to by the other party. merely because the defendants have written a letter on the top of which 'subject ..... state as a broad proposition that a clause of that description would not amount to contracting out of the jurisdiction. that this is so is made clear from what the learned judge says referring to sheik dawood rowther v. south indian ry. ..... the term that the transaction was subject to bombay jurisdiction-was printed at the top of the letter-head and it did not form part of the contract. it is in that context that the relevant remarks were made by the learned judge. we do not think that the learned judge intended to ..... it was also found that the letter, ex. a-3 was written subsequently and 'subject to madras jurisdiction' was not one of the terms of the contract in regard to the transaction which took place at janardanapuram. in view of this finding of fact, i do not think, any question of jurisdiction arises in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1966 (SC)

Gomathinayagam Pillai and ors. Vs. Pallaniswami Nadar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-02-1966

Reported in : AIR1967SC868; [1967]1SCR227

..... dhunjibhai (1) the judicial committee -of the privy council observed that the principle underlying s. 55 of the contract act did not differ from those which obtained under the law of england as regards contracts for sale of land. the judicial committee observed : "under that law equity, which governs the rights of ..... first question have already been set out. section 55 of the contract act which deals with the consequences of failure to perform an executory contract at or before the stipulated time provides by the first paragraph: "when a party to a contract promises to do a certain thing at or before a specified ..... j. having regard to the decision in jamshed v. burjorji (1), the high court rightly held that time was not of the essence of the contract. the contract was entered on march 5, 1959. on that day, the respondent paid a deposit of rs. 1,006/-. on april 4, 1959, the parties ..... produce the money or to vouch a concluded scheme for financing the transaction." in my opinion, the respondent is entitled to specific performance of the contract, and the high court rightly decreed the suit. in the result, the appeal is dismissed with costs. order in accordance with the opinion of ..... the oral agreement, in the agreements writing dated april 4, 1959 and april 15, 1959 there were definite stipulations fixing dates for performance of the contract; (ii) that the second and the third agreements contained clauses which imposed penalties upon the party guilty of default; and (iii) that appellants 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1966 (HC)

Dinshawji (Died) and ors. Vs. Abdul Rasool Khan

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-19-1966

Reported in : AIR1967AP119

..... a licence. if a partnership is lawful at its inception, because it is not intended to infringe any provision of the contract act, it nevertheless becomes unlawful when it intends to conduct the business jonder sectionicence granted to one only of the partners'. we are therefore, satisfied that ..... grant of licence to the defendant is violative of section 14 of the act and thus comes within the mischief of section 23 of the indian contract act. it cannot now be in doubt that a licence under the akbari act is a personal privilege to vend or supply liquor. even if it is ..... tender of the defendant was accepted by the concerned authority. such a contract, he contends, is not vilative of section 14 of the hyderabad abkari act, hereinafter referred to as 'the act', and therefore, not illegal under section 23 of the contract act.(7) in order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to read ..... section 14 of the act as it stood when the contract was entered into. the act is in urdu. the translation ..... issued in the name of any person and the partnership entered into after the licence is granted under the act in this case.on the showing of the plaintiff himself, the contract of partnership was entered into only to supply liquor to the districts of bidar and osmanabad after the licence .....

Tag this Judgment!

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