Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: formation of contract indian contract act Court: chennai Year: 1969 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.053 seconds)

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Wheels India Limited Vs. Khemchand Rajkumar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-31-1969

Reported in : (1970)2MLJ648

..... defendant of the bill of lading to the american bank would constitute delivery of the goods as understood by the indian contract act to the plaintiffs. a bill of lading is a shipmaster's detailed receipt to the consignor and it necessarily follows that georgelis lines inc. ..... delivery possession of the goods to the buyer; but delivery of possession under the indian contract act may be actual or constructive; and the proposition that under the c.i.f. contract as well as under the g. and f. contract delivery of the bill of lading to the buyer would be tantamount to delivery ..... can be held personally liable for the suit claim.17. the relevant provisions of section 230 of the indian contract act are these:in the absence of any contract to that effect, an agent cannot personally enforce contracts entered into by him on behalf of his principal, nor is he personally bound by them.18. ..... facts which have led to the institution of the suit may be briefly summarised. the plaintiff, wheels india limited is a company incorporated under the indian companies act. the first defendant messrs. k. rajkumar is a firm carrying on business at madras with headquarters at bombay. the second defendant m/s. national ..... defendants that the insolvency of the carrier was not in the contemplation of the parties at the time of the formation of the contract and had not been provided for in the contract and that the second defendant is not therefore bound to pay the extra shipment charges. i am inclined to accept .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 1969 (HC)

Cauvery Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Represented by General Manager Vs. K ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-09-1969

Reported in : (1970)2MLJ256

..... sugarcane in a manner that could ensure success ?and whether by reason of the said services the defendant derived any benefit ?5. whether the ingredients of section 70 of the indian contract act are satisfied for the plaintiff to bring the suit ?6. whether the suit framed for taking accounts and for claiming unspecified compensation is maintainable ?7. to what compensation, if ..... rendered certain services thereafter for securing capital, etc. and that his ambition was fulfilled after the establishment of the sugar factory by the defendant-company in pettavaithalai and by the formation of the k. c. f. limited (the kulithalai cane farms limited). in the circumstances, the lower court also held that the case of the plaintiff that he surrendered ..... for the benefit of sri n. r. sundaraja iyer and other sugarcane growers.15. after the above finding, the learned district judge held that under section 70 of the indian contract act, the plaintiff was entitled to compensation from the defendant-company.16. then there arose the question of the quantum of compensation. he noted that the plaintiff wanted compensation computed at ..... substantial error or defect in the procedure. secondly, it has gone wrong in the application of the correct law, as laid down by various decisions interpreting section 70 of the indian contract act, to the facts of the case, and therefore there was an error of law, which will attract the jurisdiction of this court in second appeal under section 100, civil procedure code .....

Tag this Judgment!


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