Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Year: 1925 Page 1 of about 195 results (0.040 seconds)

Apr 21 1925 (PC)

K.V. Periyamianna Marakkayar and Sons Vs. Banians and Co.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-21-1925

Reported in : AIR1926Mad544

..... debtor whatever sum he has rightfully paid under the guarantee, but no sums which he has paid wrongfully.16. i think that the contract act draws a distinction between contracts of indemnity and contracts of suretyship, and that contracts of suretyship, unlike contracts of indemnity, require the concurrence of three persons, namely, the principal debtor, the creditor, and the surety. the surety undertakes his obligation at ..... in my opinion, that there should be three parties to it namely the surety, the principal-debtor and the creditor ; otherwise it will only be a contract of indemnity. section 145 which enacts that in every contract of guarantee there is an implied promise by the principal debtor to indemnify the surety clearly shows that the debtor and the surety are both parties ..... as to the necessity of a request, actual or constructive, of the principal debtor to the surety in order that there may be an effective contract of suretyship.19. so far as the contract of indemnity is concerned by which a person agrees to indemnify another against loss caused by the conduct of a third person and which does not require the ..... the request express or implied of the principal debtor. beading sections 126 and 145 together, it seems to me that there can be no contract of guarantee as distinguished from a contract of indemnity unless there is privity between the principal debtor and the surety as it is difficult to speak of an implied promise between persons between whom there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 1925 (PC)

K. V. Perlyamanna Marakkayar and Sons Vs. Banians and Co.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-21-1925

Reported in : 95Ind.Cas.154

..... debtor whatever sum he has rightfully paid under the guarantee, but no sums which he has paid wrongfully.16. i think that the contract act draws a distinction between contracts of indemnity and contracts of suretyship and that contracts of suretyship, unlike contracts of indemnity, require the concurrence of three persons, namely, the principal debtor, the creditor, and the surety. the surety undertakes his obligation at ..... my opinion, that there should be three parties to it, timely, the surety, the principal debtor and the creditor;, otherwise it will only be a contract of indemnity. section 145 which enacts that in every contract of guarantee there is an implied promise by the principal debtors to indemnify the surety clearly shows that the debtor and the surety are both parties ..... as to the necessity of a request, actual or constructive, of the principal debtor to the surety in order that there may be an effective contract of suretyship.19. so far as the contract of indemnity is concerned by which a person agrees to indemnify another against loss caused by the conduct of a third person and which does not require the ..... the request express or implied of the principal debtor. heading sections 126 and 145 together, it seems to me that there can- be no contract of guarantee as distinguished from a contract of indemnity unless there is' privity between the principal debtor and the surety as it is difficult to speak of an implied promise between persons between persons whom .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1925 (PC)

(Minor) Palanivel Ramasubramania Pillay and anr., by Mother Muthammal ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-01-1925

Reported in : AIR1925Mad841; 90Ind.Cas.165

..... instances : in gadadhar ramanuj das v. ghana shy am das [1918] 3 p. l.j. 396, a son was held not liable for money, due on a contract of indemnity made by the father. in rumiengar v. secretary of state [1909] 20 m.l.j. 89, it was held that the son was not liable to pay the government ..... an auction. in mahabir prasad v. sri narayan [1918] 3 p. l.j. 396, it was held that a son was not liable, for money due on a contract of indemnity, by the father, in respect of a property sold. in rama iyengar v. secretary of state [1909] 20 m.l.j. 89 the court-fee payable to the ..... an immoral debt. it was held in raghunanda prasad v. chem ram [1915] 27 i.c. 895, that the son was bound to pay the money due under an indemnity clause, provided in a sale deed, executed by the father, on the ground that the debt was not an illegal and immoral one. in khalilul rahman v. gubind pershad ..... raghunandan prasad v. chem ram [1915] 27 i.c. 895 it was held that it was the pious duty of a son to pay the money due under an indemnity clause in a sale-deed, executed by the father and in hari singh v. sant prosad singh [1916] 32 i.c. 969, where one of two purchasers wrongly ..... in the authorised reports. messrs. woodroffe and arathoon, counsel for the respondents, argued:the first and main point is that the whole estate is liable, because the debt, contracted for no immoral purpose is due by the father of the family living under the mithila law, on this point identical with the mitakshara. this supports the sale of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1925 (PC)

N. K. N. Ramier and Bros. Vs. Durwas J. Subbier and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-09-1925

Reported in : AIR1927Mad352

..... contract owing to your breach.4. the second case is thatapart from any indemnity, you have broken the contract to take delivery of the goods from me and you must pay me damages incurred by me by reason of your default. ..... of the findings of fact which we have arrived at in this case. the case of the plaintiff rests on two grounds. he says:here is a contract of indemnity you agreed to pay me whatever loss i might have sustained by reason of not being able to perform the ..... evidence in this case worth the name to show that there was any request by the defendant to the plaintiff to extend the time for the performance of the contract. we find that all the letters written by the plaintiff to the defendant calling on him to perform have not been replied to, and so far as the ..... was filed with reference to the 16 bales, the appellant's vakil said that he would argue the appeal only as regards the 9 bales.2. according to the contract the goods had to be paid for and taken delivery of, thirty days after their arrival. they arrived on 20th june and 21st september 1918. they should have ..... with the plaintiff. the appellant purchased from messrs. ralli brothers certain yarn bales in december 1917. out of these he sold 24 bales to the defendant by two contracts dated 8th and 9th january 1918. eight bales were delivered, accepted and paid for; and out of the 16 bales it was held that 7 bales were not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1925 (PC)

N.K.N. Ramier and Brothers, Through One of the Partners N.K.N. Perumal ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-09-1925

Reported in : (1926)50MLJ264

..... contract owing to your breach.' the second case is that 'apart from any indemnity you have broken the contract to take delivery of the goods from me and you must pay me damages incurred by me by reason of your default.' ..... of the findings of fact which we have arrived at in this case. the case of the plaintiff rests on two grounds. he says 'here is a contract of indemnity. you agreed to pay me whatever loss i might have sustained by reason of not being able to perform the ..... evidence in this case worth the name to show that there was any request by the defendant to the plaintiff to extend the time for the performance of the contract. we find that all the letters written by the plaintiff to the defendant calling on him to perform have not been replied to, and so far as the ..... was filed with reference to the 16 bales the appellant's vakil said that he would argue the appeal only as regards the 9 bales.2. according to the contract the goods had to be paid for and taken delivery of thirty days after their arrival. they arrived on 20th june and 21st september, 1918. they would have ..... with the plaintiff. the appellant purchased from messrs. ralli brothers certain yarn bales in december, 1917. out of these he sold 24 bales to the defendant by two contracts dated 8th and 9th january, 1918. 8 bales were delivered, accepted and paid for; and out of the 16 bales it was held that 7 bales were not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1925 (PC)

Dayton Price and Co. Ltd. Vs. S. Rohomotollah and Co.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-03-1925

Reported in : AIR1925Cal609

..... there was any other material discrepancy between the order and the performance in an essential particular. it appears to me that these contracts have to be looked at not merely as contracts involving the general principle of indemnity but as contracts with respect to which there is a particular arrangement between the parties as to the time when and the conditions upon which the ..... the shipment was to be at new york, in my judgment this stipulation must be regarded as one which went to the root of the contract and which must be performed before the plaintiffs could claim indemnity from the defendants.41. no information was forthcoming as to whether the shipment at montreal instead of at new york would have involved the defendants ..... once the conclusion is arrived at that the stipulation that the shipment should be at new york was of the essence of the contract and was one which the plaintiffs were bound to perform before they could claim indemnity from the defendants.43. no doubt the employer of an agent is bound to indemnify him against the consequences of all lawful acts ..... for varying the port of shipment, nevertheless the agent has part performed the duties which he undertook by the contract of agency and, therefore, the stipulation as to port of shipment cannot be regarded as something which disentitles him altogether to his indemnity, but must be regarded as something which at the worst entitles the principal to make some deduction corresponding to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1925 (FN)

Michigan Pub. Util. Comm'n Vs. Duke

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-12-1925

..... interstate commerce to impose on plaintiff the onerous duties and strict liability of common carrier, and the obligation of furnishing such indemnity bond to cover the automobile bodies hauled under his contracts as conditions precedent to his right to continue to carry them in interstate commerce. see barrett v. new york, 232 ..... contains a plurality of objects, and its real object is not expressed in the title. the lower court held that 7, providing for indemnity bonds imposes a direct burden on interstate commerce, and that the provisions of 3 applicable to private carriers are foreign to the title of ..... approved by said commission." a rule adopted by the commission requires all common carriers, defined by the act, to take out such an indemnity bond, and the commission has announced that no permit will be given until there has been filed with it a certificate of the bonding ..... insurance for the protection of the . . . property carried by them in such amount as shall be ordered by said commission . . . or shall furnish an indemnity bond . . . conditioned upon the payment of all just claims and liabilities resulting from injury to . . . property carried by such carrier, and in a company ..... for hire by motor vehicle over the public highways of the state the burdens and duties of common carriers, and requiring them to furnish indemnity bonds to secure payment of claims and liabilities.resulting from injury to property carried, when applied to a private carrier without special franchise or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 1925 (FN)

Merchants Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. Vs. Smart

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-02-1925

..... provision by the state in the interest of the public, whose lives and limbs are exposed, to require that the owner in the contract indemnifying him against any recovery from him should stipulate with the insurance company that the indemnity by which he page 267 u. s. 130 saves himself should certainly inure to the benefit of the person who thereafter is ..... would be unlawful in the event of subsequent bankruptcy. the clause we have before us is just the same save in one respect. it secures to the injured person the indemnity which his injurer has provided for himself in advance to avoid payment for the injury. but the clause becomes operative only in the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of ..... the assured when he can no longer use the indemnity to pay the injured person as he should. the title to the indemnity passes out of the bankrupt or insolvent person and vests in him in whom the contract and the state law declare it should vest. the assured is divested by the terms of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1925 (PC)

A.V.K. Mayappa Chettiar Vs. N.K.L. Kolandaivelu Chettiar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-26-1925

Reported in : AIR1926Mad597; 92Ind.Cas.715

..... claims under a mortgage not executed by a stranger claiming a paramount title but by the predecessor-in-title of the first defendant. there is also an indemnity clause in the varthamanam letter saying that he should be indemnified against any loss he may sustain if rival claims were established. now, the plaintiff naturally ..... a suit for specific performance was filed against a person who agreed to sell and against a mortgagee on a mortgage created by the person who contracted to sell the property. the mortgage was with possession. the learned judges in that case stated that there was misjoinder as regards the mortgagee dealing ..... says 'i am ready to pay money to the first defendant as i am bound to do under the contract. if there is any mortgage, i am entitled to see that the money is paid to the discharge of the mortgage, so as to give me ..... against all claims by third persons. the plaintiff in this suit joined both the first defendant who was the person with whom he entered into the contract to sell, and the second defendant who was the person who claimed as a, mortgagee under a mortgage created by the predecessor-in-title of the ..... suit as against the second defendant holding that he was an improper party. the suit was filed by the plaintiff to enforce specific performance of a contract to purchase certain property for rs. 70,000. there was a mortgage over the property created by the predecessor-in-title of the first defendant, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1925 (PC)

Kathu Jairam Gujar Vs. Vishvanath Ganesh Javadekar

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-08-1925

Reported in : AIR1925Bom470; (1925)27BOMLR682

..... .l.j. 259 . in laxmanlal v. mulshankar : (1908)10bomlr553 a pleader stood bail for his client pending a criminal charge against him, and as an indemnity for the bail took from him a sale-deed and a rent-note regarding his house, in the name of the plaintiff. the consideration for the sale-deed ..... indivisible agreement. a part of a single consideration for one object was unlawful, and, therefore, the whole agreement was void under section 24 of the indian contract act, 1872.6. in the same way in this case the agreement to pay rs. 5co cannot be separated from the agreement to give survey no. 58 ..... property in dispute in the suit in which he is engaged must necessarily be contrary to public policy, and therefore, unlawful under section 23 of the indian contract act. ' it is professional misconduct for an advocate to stipulate for or agree with his client to accept as his fee or professional remuneration a share ..... giveaway to the pleaders the lands for charity he thought the claim was not sustainable.4. the question then arose whether under section 24 of the indian contract act the agreement was void because one of several considerations for a single object was unlawful. the judge said :-as it was not a reward given ..... judge of dhulia by one bhagwan devidas; that on september 23, 1917, when the vakilpatra was given to them, defendant no. 1 made a special contract in the following terms :-i have this day given you a vakilpivtra in the above suit and agree to give you both rs. 500 as inam or .....

Tag this Judgment!


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