Advanced Search Results

Abdul Kasem Ali Ahmed Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : ConstitutionContract

a direction from the High Court for payment of amounts due and payable by the State Government in contractual matters and if so, in what circumstances, such a remedy can be made available ?2. In the present

Ka Ron Lanong Vs. the State of Assam

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Contract

Acts : Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 10, 31, 32, 56 and 213; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 7, Rule 7

He observed further that although the licences of the distillers were liable to be forfeited for breach of contract, but as in the case in question the breach was due to scarcity of rice, which was not

Dinkerrai Lalit Kumar Vs. Sukhdayal Rambilas

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Contract

Reported in : AIR1947Bom293; (1946)48BOMLR821

bales. Mr. Justice Coyajee who tried the suit held that the defendants had committed a breach of the contract and that they had failed to give delivery of the 11 bales; and he referred the suit to

Abdul Gani and Co. Vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Contract

Acts : Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 70, 73, 74 and 75

Reported in : AIR1952Bom310; (1952)54BOMLR273; ILR1952Bom747

the plaintiffs for return of a deposit made by them of a sum of Rs. 3,000 under a contract which they entered into with the defendants, who are the Trustees of the Port of Bombay. The contract

Raj Rani Vs. Prem Adib

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Contract

Reported in : AIR1949Bom215; (1949)51BOMLR256

Desai, J.1. This suit raises a question of importance so far as contracts of service entered into on behalf of minors are concerned. Contracts involving service by minors may be of

Popat Namdeo Sodanvor Vs. Jagu Pandu Govekar

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Hindu Law; Indian Contract Act; Specific Relief Acts

Reported in : AIR1969Bom140; (1968)70BOMLR456; ILR1968Bom1245; 1968MhLJ665

1. This is an appeal on behalf of a minor whose suit for specific performance of a contract to purchase irremovable property has been dismissed by both the courts. Survey No. 40/A in village Koregaon belonged

Dhanrajgirji Narsinggirji Vs. Tata Sons Limited

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyContract

Reported in : AIR1924Bom473; (1924)26BOMLR858

suit filed by the plaintiffs for recovery of the deposit money, and for damages, in respect of a contract entered into between them and the deceased Raja Bahadur Narsinggirji with reference to certain immoveable property in Bombay

The Coorla Spinning and Weaving Mills Company Limited Vs. Vallabhdas K ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : ContractCivil

Reported in : AIR1925Bom547; (1925)27BOMLR1168; 94Ind.Cas.575

Marten, J.1. This is a suit brought by the plaintiffs under a contract dated October 6, 1920, in respect of the sale to the defendants of 75 out of a total

Bai Dosibai Vs. Bai Dhanbai

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyContract

Reported in : AIR1925Bom85; (1924)26BOMLR1071; 85Ind.Cas.597

the original plaintiffs came to sell the suit land to the purchaser for Rs. 66,000 under the suit contract of September 8, 1922 (Ex. B), they not only omitted to disclose to the purchaser the fact that

Baroda Oil Cakes Traders Vs. Parshottam Narayandas Bagulia and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : ContractCivil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 17 and 20; Indian Contract Act - Sections 4; County Courts Act, 1888 - Sections 7 and 74; Judicature Act, 1873 - Sections 25(6)

Reported in : AIR1954Bom491; (1954)56BOMLR575; ILR1954Bom1137

plaintiff had claimed to recover Rs. 10,800 from the defendants on the ground that there was a valid contract between the parties and that the defendants had failed to perform their part of the contract. In other