INDIAN CONTRACT ACT

Sl No.TitleCoramDate of JudgementSubjectHeadNotes 
16SUBHAS CHANDRA DAS MUSHIB Vs. GANGA PROSAD DAS MUSHIB AND ORS.Coram: MITTER, G.K.14/09/1966Indian Contract Act, s. 16-Undue influence-Burden of proof- necessity of plea being clearly raised in pleadings.The suit in the present case was for declaring that a dead of settlement executed by the plaintiff's father and the plaintiff's sister in favour of the plantiff's brothers son in respect of certain properties was fraudulent, collusive and invaClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
17JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD. Vs. ATTAR-UL-NISSA & OTHERSCoram: WANCHOO, K.N.07/10/1966Indian Contract Act (Act 9 of 1872), s. 72- State Government making excess payments into bank account of a constituent of bank-Bank whether can change entries to cancel such overpayment without consent of constituent.S took a loan from the appellant bank on the strength of an arrange merit whereby the State Government of Jammu -and Kashmir would repay it in instalments out of the land revenue to be collected by it from S's lands. Such payments on behalfClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
18LOONKARAN SETHIYA Vs. STATE BANK OF JAIPUR & ORS.Coram: HEGDE, K.S.25/04/1968Indian Contract Act 9 of 1872, s. 202-Debtor giving power of attorney to creditor bank to execute a decree in his favour- It is power coupled with interest and irrevocable-Bank an equitable assignee--Can execute decree under Code of Civil ProceduThe appellant was indebted to the respondent Bank. He executed a power of attorney in favour of the bank giving it authority to execute a decree which he had obtained in his favour. The bank filed an application for the execution of the deClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
19RAMA SHANKAR SINGH & ANR. Vs. MST. SHYAMLATA DEVI AND ORS.Coram: BACHAWAT, R.S.10/10/1968Indian Contract Act (9 of 1872), s. 43-Liability to pay rent-If joint. Bihar Tenancy Act, ss. 67(1), 184 and 193- Limitation-Plea not taken in written statement-Arrears of rent--Rate of interest.The plaintiffs defendants 5 to 7 and the ancestor of defendants 8 to 13 leased the forest rights in theft villages to defendants 1 and 2 at an annual rental. The deed mentioned the share of each lessee and the annual rent for theClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
20NARESH CHANDRA SANYAL Vs. CALCUTTA STOCK EXCHANGE ASSOCIATION LTD.Coram: SHAH, J.C.25/09/1970Companies Act (7 of 1913)-Fully paid up share-Forfeiture of- Effect-Sale of forfeited share-If illegal-Right of member to proceeds of sale-Indian Contract Act (9 of 1872), s. 74- Scope of.Under the scheme of the articles of association of the Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd., the Committee is authorised under art. 21 to expel or suspend a member on the ground inter alia that he refused to abide by the decision of CommClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
21LACHOO MAL Vs. RADHEY SHYAMCoram: GROVER, A.N.10/02/1971U.P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, ss. 1(A) and 3-Construction after 1951-Agreement that Act should apply-If binding upon landlord-Indian Contract Act (9 of 1872), s. 23-Scope of.The appellant was the tenant of the respondents shop. As the latter wanted to make some constructions they entered into ail agreement in 1962, according to which, the appellant was to vacate the shop but reoccupy it on the same rent asClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
22UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAMAN IRON FOUNDRYCoram: BHAGWATI, P.N.12/03/1974Indian Arbitration Act (10 of 1940 s. 41 (b)-Court when can issue interim in function. Indian Contract Act (9 of 1872), s. 74-Stipulation of amount of damages in contract-Claim for damages for branch--If claim for liquidated or unliquidated damagesA dispute arose regarding the performance of a contract between the appellant and respondent, each party contending that the other had committed a breach of the contract and claiming large sums of money by way of damages. The appel- lant'sClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
23DHANYALAKSHMI RICE MILLS ETC. Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES AND ANOTHERCoram: RAY, A.N. (CJ)16/02/1976Practice and Procedure-Representation by millers for permission to export rice-Permits granted on payment of surcharge to meet expenses of administrative machinery set up to ensure export-Writ of mandamus to refund money collectedThe respondent-State Government was exercising powers delegated to it by the Central Government under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. It introduced an 'Incentive Export Scheme' under which, millers, who delivered 50% of their purcClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
24UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Vs. SUGAULI SUGAR WORKS (P) LTD.Coram: RAY, A.N. (CJ)11/03/1976Indian Railway's Act as it stood amended by Act 46 of 1959 and prior to 1961 amendment Ss. 72 and 74-Liability of the Railway in respect of goods sent at Railways risk is the same as that of a bailee under the Indian Contract Act 1872 Ss. 15The non-delivery of the goods booked by the respondent on September 5, 1955 to several destinations under "Railway Risk" due to the sinking of "Barge No. 6, carrying the wagons containing the goods" led to the filing of four suits whichClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
25STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA Vs. CHITRANJAN RANGNATH RAJA AND ANR.Coram: DESAI, D.A.30/04/1980Indian Contract Act, Section 141, scope of-Discharge of surety-Conditions under which surety can be discharged under sections 139-141 of the Act, -Security of pledged goods was lost on account of the negligence of the Creditor Whether the SuThe appellant bank allowed a cash credit facility limited to Rs. 75,000/- to the principal debtor Harilal Parmananddas Adatia on his pledging 5,000 tins of groundnut oil under the lock and key of the Bank and on personal guarantClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
26STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SAKSARIA SUGAR MILLS LTD. AND ORS.Coram: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)14/02/1986The Sugar Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act 1978, s.7(1)(b) - Sugar Undertaking Notified - Only obligations, rights, liabilities etc. arising out of contracts, assurances of properties or agreements specified in theThe Sugar Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act, 1978, by Clause (b) of section 7(1) empowers the Central Government to issue a notification declaring that the operation of all or any of the contracts, assurances of propertyClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
27HAJI T.M. HASSAN RAWTHER Vs. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION.Coram: SHETTY, K.J. (J)17/11/1987Indian Contract Act, 1872: Auction-Disposal of property by State or instrumentality of the State-Resort to private negotiation instead of public auction justified in compulsive situations. Constitution of India, Article 14: Pr% The respondent, a State Government Corporation obtained decree for certain amount against the appellant and in execution proceedings a tea estate was brought for sale by court auction in 1969, but in the absence of a bidder the respClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
28SNOW WHITE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, MADRAS Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRASCoram: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J)28/04/1989Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944: ss. 4(1)(a) & 35-L--(b) Assessee--Excisable. goods sold through 'selling agents'--Assessable value--Determination of--New plea on permissible deductions not raised even before TribunThe assessee-appellants, a partnership firm carrying on manufacturing business in Madras entered into an agreement with a company based in Calcutta for sale of their product through the latter's sales organisation in all the States of India.Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
29STATE TRADING CORPN.OF INDIA LTD Vs. JAINSONS CLOTHING CORPN.Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.14/09/1994Indian Contract Act, 1872: Section 126-Contract of Guarantee-What is. Plea of fraud-Held fraud must be of egregious nature. Contract between Principal Supplier and foreign buyer-Contract also between Principal Supplier and its agent-Contract wAllowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. The High Court was wholly wrong in its conclusion that the respondent has proved prima facie case for granting injunction in favour of enforcement of the bank guarantee. The Single Judge was quite rightClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
30ARIES ADVERTISING BUREAU Vs. C.T. DEVARAJCoram: RAMASWAMY, K.22/02/1995Indian Contract Act, 1872 : S. 70-Advertisement for circus-Charges not paid-Suit laid for recovery against circus owner and its financier-Ex-parte decree against circus owner-Decree against financier-Privity of contract and Benefit pursuant to theHELD: 1. Then is no privity of contract between the appellant and the respondent. Though proposal sent for the advertisement by the appellant was approved by the respondent, he did it on behalf of the second defendant. The approval sought by the aClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
1 2 3 4 5

Comments