Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: restitution indian contract act Page 1 of about 12,321 results (0.167 seconds)

Jun 08 1960 (HC)

Mahadeo Prosad Shaw Vs. Calcutta Dyeing and Cleaning Co.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1961Cal70

..... set aside. the objection of the plaintiff landlord was that as the corporation demolished one of the structures there has been a frustration of the contract within the meaning of section 56 of the indian contract act and, therefore, no restitution is possible. this objection was over-ruled by both the courts below and hence the present appeal.4. mr. sen on behalf of the ..... . sen, therefore, submits that the doctrine of frustration being firmly established in our country as under section 56 of the indian contract act, it must be held that after the calcutta corporation demolished one of the structures the contract became frustrated and, therefore, restitution is not possible.5. mr. ganguly on behalf of the tenant has challenged the correctness of the decision of r. p ..... landlord has referred to section 59 of the indian contract act and he says that the statute and the principle underlying the samehas been applied to leases and he ..... helpful in showing how english courts decided cases under similar circumstances. he has also held at p. 322 (of scr): at p. 48 of air) that 'section 56 of the indian contract act lays down a rule of positive law and does not leave the matter to be determined according to the intention of the parties'.9. it is indeed true that he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 1959 (HC)

New Churulia Coal Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1959Cal585

..... issue as to whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount claimed in the plaint under the provisions of section 65 of the indian contract act, that is, for restitution of the sum of rs. 64,000/- which was the advantage obtained by the defendant, the union of india, under the agreement ..... on their right to relief under section 65 of the indian contract act. the appeal was heard ex parte. in spite of this, however, their lordships of the privy council came to the conclusion that the appellants ought not to be refused restitution in the suit under section 65 even though that had ..... second issue as to whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount claimed in the plaint under the provisions of section 65 of the indian contract act. the learned counsel for the defendant strongly objected to this second issue being raised on the ground that there was no foundation for any ..... , further investigation of facts is not necessary, the court would be justified in giving the plaintiff relief under the provisions of section 65 of the indian contract act even without a formal amendment of the plaint. 6. there is no doubt that the question of limitation falls to be considered and that would ..... . before the chief court it was contended on behalf of the plaintiffs that they were at least entitled to relief under section 65 of the indian contract act. the chief court, however, refused to entertain that ground of claim because it had not been pleaded and was not taken in the memorandum .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1961 (HC)

Sri Amuruvi Perumal Devasthanam Vs. K.R. Sabapathi Pillai and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1962Mad132

..... set aside. the objection of the plaintiff-landlord was that as the corporation demolished one of the structures there has been a frustration of the contract within the meaning of section 56 of the indian contract act, and, therefore, no restitution is possible. the objection was overruled by the lower courts and when the matter came before the high court, chatterjee, j., expressed his view ..... thus. when a lease is executed, there is transfer of property. section 56 of the contract act would not apply because there is a valid and subsisting contract between the parties. section ..... judgment in that case, while considering the question whether the defendants were relieved of their obligations under the lease deed by reason of the provisions of section 56 of the indian contract act, referred to the view of the supreme court in satyabrata ghose v. mugneeram bangur and co and anr. (1954) s.c.j. 1 : (1954) 1 m.l.j. 1 : (1954 ..... lease there -fore cannot be said to have become impossible of performance or rendered unlawful by the said enactment. on the plain terms of section 56 of the indian contract act, it is clear that the lessee cannot claim any relief under that section.17. a similar case was decided by a bench of the andhra high court consisting of subba .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1961 (HC)

Sri Amuruvi Perumal Devasthanam, Mayuram Taluk, Represented by Its Man ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1962)2MLJ452

..... set aside. the objection of the plaintiff-landlord was that as the corporation demolished one of the structures there has been a frustration of the contract within the meaning of section 56 of the indian contract act, and, therefore, no restitution is possible. the objection was overruled by the lower courts and when the matter came before the high court, chatterjee, j., expressed his view ..... thus. when a lease is executed, there is transfer of property. section 56 of the contract act would not apply because there is a valid and subsisting contract between the parties. section ..... judgment in that case, while considering the question whether the defendants were relieved of their obligations under the lease deed by reason of the provisions of section 56 of the indian contract act, referred to the view of the supreme court in satyabrata ghose v. mugneeram bangur and co and anr. (1954) s.c.j. 1 : (1954) 1 m.l.j. 1 : (1954 ..... lease there -fore cannot be said to have become impossible of performance or rendered unlawful by the said enactment. on the plain terms of section 56 of the indian contract act, it is clear that the lessee cannot claim any relief under that section.17. a similar case was decided by a bench of the andhra high court consisting of subba .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 1958 (HC)

Govindarajulu Naidu and ors. Vs. S.S. Naidu Alias Soundararajulu Naidu

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1958)2MLJ148

..... latha singh a.i.r. 1928 lah. 609 .22. or looked at from the point of view of sections 69 and 70 of the indian contract act, which is based on the doctrine of unjust enrichment or unjust benefit restitution is due, except in the case of volunteers or gratuitous payors and which is not the case here from persons so unjustly enriched or ..... in the monumental corpus juris of india - the indian contract act by v. v. chitaley and section appu rao, volume iv ( ..... (1919), 4th edition; story equity jurisprudence, 14th edition, 1918 ; williston contracts, revised edition, 1936-1938.)11. in india this third category of the common law which had been called quasi-contract or restitution has been developed under section 70 of the indian contract act as obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act and concerning which the latest and best exposition is to be found ..... has received any property or benefit from another it is just that he should make restitution as otherwise he would be unjustly enriched at the expense of the other. this doctrine so far as we are concerned is embodied in sections 69 and 70 of the indian contract act and it is generally recognised that these sections are much wider in scope than .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1985 (HC)

Appavoo Nadar Vs. Chellian Nadar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1985)2MLJ179

..... the claim of the plaintiff for the refund of the moneys paid, under the equitable principles prohibiting unjust enrichment and countenancing restitution which principles are the inspiration behind section 70 of the indian contract act, hereinafter referred to as the act. section 70 of the act reads as follows:where a person lawfully does anything for another person, or delivers anything to him not intending to ..... are delivered 'enjoys the benefit thereof.' it is only when the three ingredients are pleaded in the plaint that a cause of action is constituted under section 70 of the indian contract act. if any plaintiff pleads the three ingredients and proves the three features the defendant is then bound to make compensation in respect of or to restore the things so done ..... terms:.but if money is deposited and goods are supplied or if services are rendered in terms of the void contract, the provisions of section 70 of the indian contract act may be applicable. in other words, if the conditions imposed by section 70 of the indian contract act are satisfied then the provisions of that section can be invoked by the aggrieved party to the void ..... their significance were adverted to in the following terms:the three ingredients to support the cause of action under section 70 of the indian contract act are these: first, the goods are to be delivered lawfully or anything has to be done for another person lawfully. second, the thing done or the goods delivered is so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1959 (HC)

Chiranji Lal S/O Bansi Lal Vs. Hans Raj S/O Ishar Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1961P& H437

..... has been called unjust enrichment or unjust benefit, and according to the english law which has been incorporated in india, a remedy is provided for restitution under section 65 of the indian contract act in such transactions styled as quasi-contracts.6. in this view of the matter, i would uphold the decision of the lower appellate court and dismiss this appeal with costs. this ..... recover back the purchase-money paid by him as there has been a total failure of consideration. the restitution is to be made on the principles which have been embodied in section 63 of the indian contract act under which 'when an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under such agreement or ..... contract is bound to restore it, or to make compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it ..... spolka akcyjna v. fairbairn lawson combe barbour, ltd., 1943 ac 32, the plaintiff is clearly entitled to recovery. in this house of lords' case it was held that 'where a contract on its true construction stipulates that a particular result shall follow, if frustration should afterwards occur, that stipulation governs the matter ..... but, in the absence of aterm of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1892 (PC)

Kotta Penta Reddi and anr. Vs. Varithi Reddi Anki Reddi Alias Pichi Re ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1892)2MLJ34

..... mandar l.r. 18 i. a. 158). the payment of the price in such a case is decreed clearly by way of restitution, and not by way of compensation for the breach of contract, (see section 65 of the indian contract act, illus d). i cannot therefore accept the view that this is a claim for damages as alleged. to constitute such a sum in ..... price alleged to have been paid for goods sold but not delivered. to determine the amount of damages in these cases it is no doubt necessary to know what the contract price was, but the payment of the price has nothing to do with the matter, as the vendee would be entitled to recover damages from the vendor who has broken ..... the price agreed has been paid by the vendee to the vendor or not. when property is sold and the vendor cannot perform his part of the contract the ground on which the vendee is held entitled to recover the price paid is, that there has been a total failure of consideration (want v. stallibrass l.r. 8 ..... . the question argued before me is whether the dismissal of a suit for want of a certificate under act vii of 1889, is right. the contention for the plaintiff is that the suit is one for the recovery of unliquidated damages for breach of contract. if this were correct, no certificate would be necessary, as even the amount of a verdict in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1996 (SC)

Mafatlal Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2002(83)ECC85; 1997(89)ELT247(SC); JT1996(11)SC283; 1996(9)SCALE457; (1997)5SCC536; [1996]Supp10SCR585; [1998]111STC467(SC)

..... duty to another and has not really suffered any loss or prejudice, there is no question of reimbursing him and he cannot successfully sustain an action for restitution, based on section 72 of the indian contract act. with great respect, i fully concur with the aforesaid conclusion of my learned brother. but, in view of the importance of the question raised, i would ..... stood the test of time for nearly four decades and there is no requirement either in section 72 of the indian contract act or in any of the above decisions, holding that in order to claim refund or restitution based on section 72 of the contract act, the liability (duty) should not have been passed on. our attention was also invited to the decision of ..... the duty paid by him, placing reliance on section 72 of the indian contract act? the further question as to whether an action by way of civil suit or a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution will lie in the light of various amendments to the act, claiming 'refund' or 'restitution', also arises for consideration.4. i perused the draft judgment prepared ..... an action for money 'had and received.' an action for money 'had and received' is an action 'founded on simple contract' which has been called quasi contract or restitution'. pollock & mulla indian contract and specific relief acts (10th edition) page 598.9. the law of restitution is founded upon the principle of 'unjust enrichment'. as stated by the learned authors, lord goff of chieveley and gareth jones .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 1957 (HC)

Nallaya Goundar Vs. Ramaswami Goundar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1958)2MLJ86

..... . in other words, we must look to the substance and not the form. i shall first deal with the claim for restitution rested by this appellant on section 69. the following passage from pollock and mulla's indian contract act and specific relief act, (eighth edition) 1957, at page 414, is apposite:this section (69) only applies to payments made bonafide for the protection of ..... upheld by the learned subordinate judge in the partition suit. he cannot get restitution on the doctrine of unjust enrichment from ramaswami goundan.19. the appellant, however, rested his case in the lower court on section 69 of the indian contract act and rests his case on section 72 of the contract act here. this change of section was objected to as taking a new ground ..... person has received any property or benefit from another it is just that he should make restitution as otherwise he would be unjustly enriched at the expense of the other. this doctrine so far we are concerned is embodied in sections 69 and 70 of the indian contract act and it is generally recognised that these sections are much wider in scope than the ..... irrelevant and the decisions in satyam v. perraju : air1931mad753 and venkatadrl apparao v. verikatw kutumbarao : air1941mad635 are not applicable.24. in regard to the invocation of section 72 of the indian contract act, the follow-i ing passage from pollock & mulla (ibid) at page 439 is again apposite for the investigation on hand.the cases where money is deposited to have a sale .....

Tag this Judgment!


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