Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Page 2 of about 943 results (0.021 seconds)

Apr 11 1958 (HC)

Janwatraj Vs. Jethmal

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1958Raj343

..... the application of article 83 in this series can be resisted so far as the present case is concerned.as already held above, the suit contract was a contract of indemnity, and the plain language of this article clearly seems to me to apply to it. the period of limitation provided with reference to this article ..... the same upon umar bhai's default. in other words, the plaintiff was undoubtedly damnified. it may be that this damnification occurred not on the date the contract of indemnity was executed, that is, the 20th august, 1947, but later, and if that is so, it is enough to say that if the suit is ..... be within time. it is, however, contended that the time from which the period has been prescribed to run under this article is not when a contract of indemnity may have taken place, but when the plaintiff is in actual fact damnified or put to loss.what is argued is that the plaintiff gave his ..... himself, or by the conduct of any other person, is called a contract of indemnity'.'section 128 lays down, with respect to the liability of a surety, that it is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless it is ..... person to whom the guarantee is furnished. it would be convenient to give at this place the definition of a contract of indemnity also, vide section 124 of the contract act. the definition is this :'a contract by which one party promises to save the other from loss caused to him by the conduct of the promisor .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 1959 (HC)

Hazari Lal Vs. Hari Ram

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1959Raj153a

..... 34 mad 167, thought that article 83 can be made applicable only to a case where there is an express contract of indemnity and because the duty of principal under section 222 of the contract act, to indemnify the agent is an obligation imposed by law and is attached to the relation of principal and ..... barred. besides the above ruling, there is a string of rulings of lahore high court in which it has been held that article 83 of the contract act applies to the case of an aratia suing for the money spent on behalf of his principal. the earliest ruling is that of punjab chief ..... plaintiff filed a suit for the recovery of the said amount. it was observed:'once the relationship of principal and agent is established, section 222, contract act, comes into operation. the obligation of the principal to indemnify the agent, therefore, flows from the nexus of the principal and agent. it is a ..... to indemnify him against the consequences of all lawful acts done by such agent in exercise of the authority conferred upon him. the contract of agency, therefore, implies a contract by the principal to indemnify the agent against the consequences of all lawful acts done by such agent in exercise of the authority conferred ..... the present case, and not article 61. article 83 is a special article which applies to the case of a suit upon any contract to indemnify, other than a contract covered by article 81, or article 82 which apply respectively to a suit by a surety against a principal-debtor and by a surety .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1958 (HC)

Surajmal and ors. Vs. Doongarmal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1959Raj27

..... to be of a wagering nature, we have no hesitation in saying that there can be no question of the collateral contracts whether of indemnity or otherwise being bad because the principal contracts are not of wagering nature at all. we, therefore, reject this contention also.18. we now proceed briefly to ..... and no suit shall be allowed in any court of justice for recovering any sum of money paid or payable in respect of any such contract or contracts or any such agreement or agreements as aforesaid.''30b. no suit shall be allowed in any court of justice for recovering any commission, brokerage ..... these provisions can be called into operation, the principal transactions in respect of which the brokerage, commission or losses etc. are claimed must be proved as wagering contracts. see sassoon v. tokersey, ilr 28 bom 616 (d) and chimanlal v. nyamatrai, air 1938 bom 44 (e).we entirely agree with this view ..... where the business is done through a commission agent, it may be said possibly that the defendant's intention was to gamble nevertheless the contracts cannot be condemned as being violative of section 30 for the reason that evidence would be lacking as to the original intention of such third ..... plaintiffs to secure them against loss.the plaintiffs delivered merely 300 tons to some of the defendants,, and as for the balance they made cross-contracts and paid differences. the trial court decreed the suit but on appeal an appellate bench of the high court dismissed the suit holding that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 1971 (HC)

Maliram and ors. Vs. Jagmohan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1971WLN632

..... his representative character as heir that the plaintiff can be made liable to such refund, and that liability depends, it appears to us upon whether there was an implied contract of warranty or indemnity as to the title co sell the village between subbaraya and the 1st defendant's father. that is a question which must, we think, be left for determination ..... undivided coparcener with the incidental right of partition and the transferee was not entitled to more than the moiety of the village lands which were alone the subject of the contract of sale. it was contended on behalf of the alienee that the plaintiff had succeeded as heir to the share of subaraya in the rest of the family property and .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1971 (HC)

Shankarlal Vs. Chimanlal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1971WLN163

..... as well as the defendants. the above suit was decreed only against the plaintiffs but was dismissed against the defendants because it was held that there was no privity of contract between the maharaja of kishengarh and the defendants. maharaja of kissinger in execution of the decree recovered from the plaintiffs rs. 7000/- on 26th april, 1968, rs. 4000/- on 3rd .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 1960 (HC)

Hagami Lal Ram Prasad, a Firm and ors. Vs. Bhuralal Ram NaraIn and ors ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1961Raj52

..... principal.the right to such indemnity, as pointed out earlier, was founded on section 222 of the law of contract. the right to indemnity, which was an incident of the contract of agency was not hit by the provisions of the second order at all and was a matter which ..... 1943 when the order in question stood repealed. besides the suit is really not one to enforce any contract relating to purchase or sale of cotton within the prohibition of the above notification or order. it is a suit by an agent claiming indemnity against the principal for the loss which the agent had suffered in carrying out the directions of the ..... . we hold that in the circumstances of this case, section 30-b of the mewar contract act, 1942 was no bar to the plaintiffs' claim. where the principal contracts themselves have not been established to be of wagering nature, there can be no question of collateral contracts whether of indemnity or otherwise to be assailed on that footing.21. lastly, the learned judge appears ..... to have thought that the transactions were hit by the indian cotton (forward contracts and options prohibition) order, 1943 which is said to have been in force at the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 1959 (HC)

Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1960Raj92

..... the agreement the plaintiff should either be exempted from payment of excise duty or the excise duty paid by it should be reimbursed under the indemnity clause contained in the agreement. the trial court held that the agreement was not binding on the united state of rajasthan or on the state ..... rajasthan and the liability to indemnify had devolved on the state of rajasthan the agreement would have become frustrated within the meaning of section 56, contract act, on the coming into fores of the finance act, 1950, because the consideration for the agreement namely payment of 7 1/2 per ..... of the community when the question arises and its freedom of action in matters which concern the welfare of the state cannot be hampered by contract. the power to exempt from tax is sovereign legislative power. the law is already well established that future legislative action cannot be fettered. i ..... the consideration for the agreement became unlawful with effect from 1-4-50 and the contract was frustrated under section 56 of the contract act. it is therefore not open to the plaintiff to enforce the indemnity clause contained in the agreement even if the agreement amounted to a special law and the ..... indemnity clause contained in it was not affected by the rajasthan excise duties ordinance 1949 and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 1976 (HC)

Automobiles Transport (Rajasthan) Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Dewalal and o ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1977Raj121

..... of a vehicle, the policy comes to an end. it has been held that in the absence of stipulation to the contrary, an insurance policy, which is a personal contract of indemnity lapses upon the transfer of the motor vehicle and the benefit of the policy is not available to the transferee without any express agreement with the insurance company. in view ..... amount for the relevant period.(6) in a claim for damages for death under section 110-b of the act, as it now stands, sums payable on death under any contract of social assurance or insurance are to be disregarded, but the reasonable prospect(s) of receiving benefits such as compulsory employers' insurance, whether contributory or non-contributory gratuity and pension ..... insurance company is limited only to rs. 2,000/-. the liability of the insurer cannot exceed the one that is provided in the statute, unless there is a contract to the contrary. no such contract has been brought to our notice. the insurer had specifically taken this plea and the tribunal, therefore, appears to have fallen into error by fixing the liability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 1976 (HC)

Automobile Transport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dewalal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1976WLN783

..... of a vehicle, the policy comes to an end. it has been held that in the absence of stipulation to the contrary, an insurance policy, which is a personal contract of indemnity lapses upon the transfer of the motor vehicle and the benefit of the policy is not available to the transferee without any express agreement with the insurance company. in view ..... relevant amount for the relevant period.(6) in a claim for damages for death under section 110b of the act as it now stands, sums payable on death under any contract of social assurance or insurance are to be disregarded, but the reasonable prospect(s) of receiving benefits such as compulsory employers' insurance, whether contributory or non-contributory gratuity and pension ..... the insurance company is limited only to rs. 2000/-. the liability of the insurer cannot exceed the one that is provided in the statute, unless there is a contract to the contrary. no such contract has been brought to our notice. the insurer had specifically taken this plea and the tribunal, therefore, appears to have fallen in to error by fixing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1976 (HC)

The United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Mst. ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1976Raj178

..... injured by negligent driving for which the policy holder is responsible, the passenger would have a claim to be compensated by the policy holder, and an indemnity against other claims as provided in the policy in question. i do not think that this case has any relevance apart from definition of a 'third ..... person and does not say that the minimum limits of compulsory coverage fixed by it in certain specified cases must always remain unaltered even by voluntary contract between the parties. so far as the liability which arises under the provisions of motor vehicles act is concerned, it is only the tribunal established ..... and life insurance corporation ltd. 1943 ac 121 wherein it was observed that the governing conception is that the insurer is one party to the contract and the policy holder another party and that claims made by others in respect of the negligent use of the vehicle may be inter alia described ..... not required to cover any liability in respect of passenger carried in a vehicle not run for hire or reward, but the insurer can, by contract, extend its liability in any respect beyond the requirements of the act and also safeguard its interest fully by providing a term in the policy that ..... of the decree, of any sum not exceeding the sum assured, payable thereunder. this is so because the claimant is not a party to the contract of insurance and he is merely a statutory beneficiary. the tribunal cannot award to him as against the insurer anything more than what the statute allows. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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