Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: karnataka Year: 1969 Page 1 of about 12 results (0.013 seconds)

Feb 04 1969 (HC)

M.S. Devoraj Vs. S.V. Krishnamurthy

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Feb-04-1969

Reported in : AIR1969Kant350; AIR1969Mys350; (1969)2MysLJ580

..... this particular case such a contingency does not arise. it is clear from the documents that i have referred to that the plaintiff had entered into a contract with the contractor for an on behalf of the principal, i.e. the defendant. knowing this well, if the contractor had chosen to initiate any ..... if the plaintiff in those circumstances made a payment, it would be voluntary and officious and cannot secure him the benefit of s. 70 of the contract act. this decision also lays down the proposition that in order to claim the benefit of s. 70, it must be shown that the defendants had ..... with discretion they enable the courts to do substantial justice in cases where it would be difficult to impute to the persons concerned relations actually created by contract. it is, however, especially incumbent of final courts of fact to be guarded and circumspect in their conclusions and not to countenance acts or payments ..... mentioned above, that is, the scope of section 70 of the act with reference to the facts of this case.5. section 70 of the contract act reads as follows:--'where a person lawfully does anything for another person, or delivers anything to him, not intending to do so gratuitously, and such ..... 4027/- by the defendant (plaintiff ?) was not lawful but voluntary and the plaintiff cannot have the benefit of the provisions of section 70 of the contract act. the learned district judge found that the payment made by the plaintiff though it enures to the benefit of the defendant, is no more than .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1969 (HC)

D.M. Nagaraja Rao Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-29-1969

Reported in : [1971]41CompCas621(Kar); (1969)2MysLJ83

..... order that the respondent would pass while terminating the services of the petitioner would be an order wholly in the exercise of the powers conferred by the terms of the contract and not under any statute or law. the result of this position would be that a writ cannot be issued against the respondent in the nature of certiorari for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 1969 (HC)

N. Bommon Behram and anr. Vs. the Government of Mysore and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-06-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Kant89; AIR1970Mys89

..... of the property then the making of the award as properly understood must involve the communication of the offer to the party concerned. that is the normal requirement of the contract law as its applicability to cases of award, made under the act cannot be reasonably excluded....... (the underlining (here in ' ') is ours). it would be manifest from these propositions laid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1969 (HC)

Dasappa (D.M.) Vs. Labour Court and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-25-1969

Reported in : ILR1969KAR261; (1970)ILLJ485Kant; (1969)2MysLJ190

..... him under s. 3 of the act. sub-section (1) contains a general proposition laying down that every employee shall be paid wages for each of the holidays, notwithstanding any contract to the contrary. the word 'employee' as defined in s. 2(2) has no reference either to the permanent or temporary character of a person employed in an industrial establishment ..... s. 5 of the act, which deals with wages on a holiday allowed under s. 3, we think it necessary to reproduce the entire section : '5. wages. - (1) notwithstanding any contract to the contrary, every employee shall be paid wages for each of the holidays allowed to him under s. 3. (2) where an employee works on any holiday allowed under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 24 1969 (HC)

P. Janardhana Shetty Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-24-1969

Reported in : [1970(20)FLR355]; ILR1969KAR581; (1970)IILLJ738Kant; (1970)1MysLJ191

..... because notoriously silicosis is a disease of slow onset and it cannot be supposed that the legislature intended that every worker disabled after 1946, must prove that the disease was contracted or that the damage was done to him after 1946, which would involve there being a long period of many years of uncertainty. 90. but in regard to s. 2 ..... in respect of something that has already happened, because generally it would not be reasonable for a legislature to do that. so, if a worker has already sustained injury or contracted disease at a time when the employer is under no statutory liability to him arising out of that injury or disease, there would in general be a presumption that an ..... such tort, contract, debt, or obligation'. 79. by s. 4 of that act, it is provided that nothing in part i of the act, should affect any legal proceedings in respect of any ..... reason only of his being her husband, be liable to (a) in respect of any tort committed by her whether before or after the marriage, or in respect of any contract entered into, or debt or obligation incurred, by her before the marriage; or (b) to be sued, or made a party to any legal proceeding brought, in respect of any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 24 1969 (HC)

P. Janardhana Shetty and anr. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) by Secretar ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-24-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Kant171; AIR1970Mys171

..... because, notoriously silicosis is a disease of slow onset and it cannot be supposed that the legislature intended that every worker disabled after 1946, must prove that the disease was contracted or that the damage was done to him after 1946, which would involve there being a long period of many years of uncertainty.77. but in regard to section 2 ..... respect of some-thing that has already happened, because generally it would not be reasonable for a legislature to do that. so, if a worker has already sustained injury or contracted a disease at a time when the employer is under no statutory liability to him arising out of that injury or disease, there would in general be a presumption that ..... such tort, contract, debt, or obligation. by section 4 of that act, it is provided that nothing in part i of the act, should affect any legal proceedings in respect of any tort ..... , by reason only of his being her husband, be liable-- (a) in respect of any tort committed by her whether before or after the marriage, or in respect of any contract entered into, or debt or obligation incurred, by her before the marriage; or (b) to be sued, or made a party to any legal proceeding brought, in respect of any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1969 (HC)

K.N. Marularadhya Vs. the Mysore State

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Feb-03-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Kant114; AIR1970Mys114

somnath iyer, j.1. in these writ petitions, many common questions of law arise for decision. those questions pertain either to the constitutionality or to the interpretation of the provisions of the mysore agricultural produce marketing (regulation) act, 1966 which came into force on may 1, 1968.2. in the new state of mysore which came into being under the provisions of the states reorganisation act on november 1, 1956, there were six laws operating with respect to the regulation of the marketing of agricultural produce either on one species or of the other. they were: the madras commercial crops markets act, 1933 (madras act xx of 1933) as in force in bellary district; the madras commercial crops markets act, 1933 (madras act xx of 1933) as in force in the district of south kanara and the taluk of kollegal; the bombay agricultural produce markets act, 1939 (bombay act xxii of 1939) as in force in the districts of dharwar, belgaum, bijapur and north kanara which were originally in the state of bombay and which became part of the new state of mysore; the hyderabad agricultural market act. 1339-f (hyderabad act ii of 1339 fasli) which was in force in the districts of bidar, gulbarga and raichur; the mysore agricultural produce markets act, 1939 (mysore act xvi of 1939) which was in force in the area of what is generally known as the former state of mysore; and, the coorg agricultural produce markets act, 1956 (coorg act vii of 1956) which was in force in the district of coorg.3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1969 (HC)

T. Narayanaswamy Vs. Regional Transport Authority and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Feb-26-1969

Reported in : AIR1971Kant276; AIR1971Mys276; (1970)2MysLJ121

..... state that, according to the definition contained in section 2 (2) 'permit' means only a document issued by appropriate transport authority 'authorizing the use of a transport vehicle as a contract carriage, or stage carriage, or authorizing the owner as a private or public carrier to use such vehicle'. under section 45 of the act, every application for a permit has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1969 (HC)

State of Mysore Vs. M.N. Vasantha Kumar

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-11-1969

Reported in : 1969CriLJ1299

k. bhimiah, j.1. the state has filed the above appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondent passed by the sessions judge, coorg mercara, in s.c. no. 2 of 1967, the respondent was tried for offences under sections 302 and 201, penal code. there is a criminal petition also filed by the state under section 561 a of the code of criminal procedure for expunging adverse remarks passed by the sessions judge in paragraphs 16, 19, 20, 45, 46 and 48 of the judgment under appeal. as both these matters are connected, they are clubbed and heard together and disposed of by common judgment.2 the allegation against the respondent (accused) is that on 11-8.1966 at 5 p. m. at mcolegadde in charangala village, he caused the death of his brother, montana malmallayya by inflicting injuries with a bill hook and knowing that an offence under section 302, penal code punishable with death or imprisonment for life was committed, caused the evidence of the said offence disappear by concealing the dead body of motana malmallayya inside bushes with an intention to screen himself from legal punishment.3. the learned sessions judge who tried the accused for offences under sections 802 and 201 of the penal code, or want of legal evidence though he was morally convinced that the accused was mainly responsible for the murder of his younger brother, malmallayya, with a view to usurping the entire ancestral property for himself, acquitted him. the state has challenged the judgment and the order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 1969 (HC)

K.O. Krishnaswamy and ors. Vs. Director, Enforcement Directorate, Mini ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-04-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Kant2; AIR1970Mys2; (1969)2MysLJ601

..... or would be willing to purchase them, which generally speaking is the market value of the goods, what is so payable by him as the price under a bona fide contract of sale, is, what should be repatriated and not the artificial value stated in the declaration. it is this distinction which is emphasised by the word 'payable' occurring in clause ..... investigation could not support any other conclusion. if x is the declared value of the exported goods but y is the proper price for which they are sold, under a contract which is above the reproach ofcollusion or collaboration for circumven-tion of the law, the amount payable by the foreign buyer is y and not x. the clear finding of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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