Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Year: 2010 Page 1 of about 3,985 results (0.095 seconds)

Jan 22 2010 (SC)

Trimex International Fze Ltd. Dubai Vs. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd., India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-22-2010

Reported in : JT2010(1)SC474; 2010(1)SCALE574; (2010)3SCC1; 2010(2)LC655(SC)

..... . the acceptance conveyed by the respondent, which has already been extracted supra, satisfies the requirements of section 4 of the indian contract act 1872. section 4 reads as under:communication when complete-the communication of an acceptance is against the acceptor, when it comes ..... vedanta at 3:06 pm on 16.10.2007, it came to his knowledge that an irrevocable contract was concluded. apart from this, the mandate of section 7 of the indian contract act stipulated that an acceptance must be absolute and unconditional has also been fulfilled. it is true that ..... dresser rand s.a (supra) rejected the contention that the acceptance of a modification to the general conditions would not constitute the conclusion of the contract itself. on the other hand, in the present case, after the suggested modifications had crystallized over several emails. further in para 32 in dresser ..... [email protected]; venkateshwar raosubject: trimex-imported_5 shipments 1.docimportance : highattachments: trimex-imported_5 shipments 1.doc dear swayam, please find the draft contract with clarification on various points as discussed in meetings and on phone today.please confirm the same in p-12from: rajesh ..... for the delay or cancellation of any or all shipment(s) under this contract will be fully guaranteed to us and that val will pay the amount without demur.matter urgent as we have to act fast before owners nominate any far as rta is concerned we .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2010 (HC)

Dr. M.i. Itty Vs. Kerala Financial Corporation,

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-05-2010

..... that the surety is discharged. the apex court also negatived the contention that by reason of the non-availability of the security in terms of section 141 of the indian contract act, 1872, the contract of guarantee stood frustrated. therefore, the guarantors cannot be heard to contend that as the security offered by the company, the principal debtor, has been lost, they are discharged ..... principal debtor. the guarantors have by agreeing to the stipulations in the loan agreements/deed of guarantee quoted above, waived their rights under section 140 of the indian contract act, 1872 to step into the shoes of the creditor and to proceed against the principal debtor. therefore, in our opinion no reliance can be placed on section 140 of the indian ..... they are the principal debtors and that they have waived all their rights as sureties which they are otherwise entitled to enforce under sections 140 and 141 of the indian contract act, 1872. therefore, the guarantors cannot contend that upon payment of the balance amount due from the company they will be vested with all the rights which the creditor had against the ..... no longer in existence and its assets have been sold, the right of the surety to proceed against the principal debtor recognised under sections 140 and 141 of the indian contract act, 1872 has been lost. in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the sureties are liable to be proceeded against, it is contended. ext.r1(a) loan agreement entered into between .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 2010 (HC)

Msm Satellite (Singapore) Pte Ltd. and ors. Vs. World Sport Group (Mau ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-17-2010

..... run affect the judicial process itself. if such a course is permitted, that might run counter to the object and purpose of inserting sections 23 and 28 in the indian contract act, 1872. in other words, the impact of all this on indian laws would be tremendous. we would be failing in our duty if we do not notice the same and take ..... evidence by either party and such a situation cannot be properly gone into by the arbitrator. the reason for this appears to be obvious.41. section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 reads thus :"28. agreements in restraint of legal proceedings, void. - every agreement -(a) by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under or in respect of ..... .125 crores after getting back the same from defendant- mauritius company.22. mr. dave submitted that the appellant-plaintiff (sony) also invokes the provisions of section 23 of the indian contract act, 1872 and submits that the very agreement dated 25th march, 2009 under which the respondent- mauritius company was to be paid rs.425 crores for the so called "facilitation services" was ..... not static. in construing this expression, the judges must look beyond the narrow fields of past precedents. therefore, the object in inserting section 23 and section 28 in the indian contract act, 1872 from which assistance could be drawn, appears to be that a stipulation that no action should be brought in a court of law for enforcing the rights under a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 2010 (SC)

Dilawari Exporters Vs. Alitalia Cargo and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-16-2010

..... was the nature of relationship between respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1?11. section 186 of the indian contract act, 1872 (for short 'the contract act') lays down that the authority of an agent may be expressed or implied. as per section 187 of the contract act, an authority is said to be express when it is given by words spoken or written, and an authority ..... may be accounted circumstances of the case. section 188 of the contract act prescribes that an agent having an authority to do an act has authority to do every lawful thing which is necessary in order to do such act. section 237 of the contract act provides that when an agent has, without authority, done acts or incurred obligations to third persons on behalf of his principal ..... , the principal is bound by such acts or obligations, if he has by his words or conduct induced such third persons to believe ..... . 1. while holding so, the commission observed thus:it is not disputed by the parties that air waybill (sic) alone is a contract between the parties. firstly we see that part iii chapter ii of schedule ii of the act does not even remotely refer to any other document except air waybill (sic). we find that on the air waybill (sic) which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2010 (SC)

The Managing Director, Hassan Co-operative Milk Producer's Society Uni ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-26-2010

..... to time by his principal, is not subject in its exercise to the direct control and supervision of the principal. 21. after taking into consideration section 182 of the indian contract act, 1872 that defines 'agent', the majority view recorded its conclusion thus:20. thus on both counts, the principal question as well as the subsidiary question must be answered against the ..... shall make his own arrangements for the engaging the workers required for loading and unloading and transport operations and further agrees to abide by the provisions of the contract labour (regulation and abolition) act in the matter of payment of their wages etc. and further indemnify the hcmp sul against any claim by such workers.14) the contractor shall strictly confirm ..... direct control of the contractor. exercise of supervision and issue of some direction by the principal employer over the activities of the contractor and his employees is inevitable in contracts of this nature and that by itself is not sufficient to make the principal employer liable. that the contractor is not an agent of the principal employer under section ..... appellant does not appoint the officers and subordinates to collect the milk from the societies located in different places and (b) that appellant calls for tenders and awards the contract for transportation of milk for specified period at a particular rate per kilometer. the contractors engage workers for that work but such workers are neither directly nor indirectly employees of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2010 (HC)

Food Corporation of India Vs. Mahesh Kumar and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-23-2010

..... arises for consideration in the present proceedings is the test to be adopted for computation of damages. section 73 of the indian contract act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as 'act, 1872') prescribes the test for computation of damages. the said section 73 reads as under:73. compensation for loss or damage caused by breach ..... based on two rules. compensation is recoverable for any loss or damage which i) naturally arose in the usual course of things from the breach or,ii) the parties knew, at the time of contract, as likely to result from the breach.11 ..... of the contract must be taken into account.10. in a.k.a.s. jamal v. moolla dawood, sons and co. reported in (1916) ac 175, the privy council has held that section 73 is declaratory of the common law as to damages. in my view, section 73 of act, 1872 is clearly ..... of contract.- when a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for ..... issue nos. 6 and 8. he submits that the arbitral tribunal even after coming to the conclusion that respondent-claimant had committed breach of the contract, has not awarded any compensation to petitioner-objector on the ground that the petitioner had failed to prove loss on the date of breach.5. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 2010 (HC)

Guru Ispat Limited and anr. Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jan-11-2010

..... follows. with respect to the amounts mentioned in sbi's letter dated august 2, 1994, recovered by sbi in exercise of a right claimed under section 171 of the indian contract act, 1872, the petitioners will be free to approach the appropriate civil court in accordance with law. within four weeks from the date of communication of this order sbi shall pay the ..... a pure private law contractual right. in my view, the petitioners, questioning the validity of sbi's demand and consequential exercise of its right under section 171 of the indian contract act, 1872, should be relegated to the civil court for seeking adjudication and determination of all questions pertaining to sbi's section 171 action.9. i am, however, unable to see how ..... that in view of guru ispat's liability indicated in sbi's letter dated august 2, 1994, sbi lawfully exercised its statutory right available under section 171 of the indian contract act, 1872.6. mr. bhattacharjee has argued that even if it is assumed that sbi was entitled to exercise its right under section 171, it is beyond comprehension how it can withhold .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 2010 (HC)

Smt. Nilima Ghosh Vs. Harjeet Kaur and ors

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-21-2010

..... the above two reports did declare the appellant a chronic case of schizophrenia and unfit for service, but in view of sections 11 & 12 of the indian contract act, 1872, for declaring the two agreements to sell dated february 21, 1985 and september 07, 1987 illegal and invalid, what has to be seen is whether she was ..... testimony to her claim?before i examine the evidence on record, i deem it proper to refer to sections 11 & 12 of the indian contract act, 1872, as they have a bearing on the issue. section 11 tells us, who are the persons competent to enter into a ..... sound mind but occasionally of unsound mind. what has to be seen is, whether at the relevant time and that relevant time is when he made the contract, he was capable of understanding it and forming a rational view as to its effects upon his interest.the appellant in support of her plea that she ..... of action against the defendant no.1? opd17. whether the suit has not been tenable in the present form? opd1.8. whether there is no privity of contract among the plaintiff and defendant no.2 & 3? opd 2, 39. relief to which the parties are entitled.the learned additional district judge on both the ..... whether the plaintiff is entitled to the decree of mandatory injunction against the defendants? opp3. whether the defendant no.1 is not competent to enter into a valid contract for agreement to sell the dispute property? opd14. whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties? opd15. whether the agreements to sell dated 21 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2010 (HC)

P.T. Munshi Ram and Associates Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-31-2010

..... s. a.t. brij paul singh (supra), the supreme court, while considering section 73 of the indian contract act, 1872 held that when in a case, the party awarding the work is in breach of contract, and improperly rescinds it, the other party or contractor is entitled to claim damages for loss of expected ..... hearing. under the circumstances, the court has to decide whether there was a breach of contract premised upon which damages are to be quantified, on the basis of principles underlying section 73 of the indian contract act.21. this court has no doubt that the plaintiff could not proceed to take charge ..... could not start work and take charge of the site. the problem persisted right through 1993; ultimately, ending on 16.06.1994 when the contract was terminated, by dda. there is some indication from the material that the dda considered giving an alternative construction site at jasola to the plaintiff ..... cross examination that the land belonged to dda, but expressed unawareness whether possession was with it (the dda) when the plaintiff was awarded the contract.14. the written statement of dda clearly states in more than one place that moti goel had secured an injunction; even the letter written to ..... of the site due to an obstruction which was also undisputed by the dda though it could have been reasonably considered or in any event was not addressed within reasonable time after the award of contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 13 2010 (SC)

S.P.Gupta Vs. Ashutosh Gupta

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-13-2010

Reported in : 2010(6)SCC562

..... that the accused no.1 was the sole owner of the property. 11. referring to the submissions made by mr. lekhi on section 18 of the indian contract act, 1872, mr. gurnani urged that sub-section (1) of section 18 was quite clear as to what constituted misrepresentation. 12. as far as the decision in nageshwar ..... within the ambit of the expression "misrepresentation" as defined in section 18 of the indian contract act, 1872, since neither did he has any intention to deceive the father of the respondent, nor did he gain any advantage in acting as the agent of the accused no.1 for the sole purpose of receiving the consideration ..... out a prima facie case to go to trial. the petitioner may have discharged his functions as a constituted attorney for the accused no.1 by acting as a liaison between the accused no.1 and the father of the respondent, but that does not in itself indicate that he did not have ..... assurance as to the title of the accused no.1 at the time the agreement for sale was executed or whether he acted beyond the scope of his authority under the power of attorney, were matters that raised triable issues and could only be determined by leading evidence at the ..... and the accused no.1 as he was the constituted attorney of the said accused. the learned single judge also observed that whether the petitioner had acted with dishonest intentions or as to whether he was unaware of the dishonest intentions of the accused 4 no.1 or that he himself held out no .....

Tag this Judgment!

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