Court : Chennai
Reported in : 95Ind.Cas.154
Kumaraswami Sastri, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the respondents who were the Dubashes of the 1st defendant company for the recovery of Rs. 73,117 5-7 from the 1st defendant or in the alternative to direct the 2nd defendant -to pay either the plaintiffs or the 1st defendant the amount due by them.2. The case for the plaintiffs is that by a Dubash agreement dated the 21st of November 1912 entered into between them and the 1st defendant, they Were appointed Banians or Dubashes of the 1st defendant to push certain, branches of the business of the 1st defendant, that the said agreement inter alia provided that the. plaintiffs were to guarantee the due completion of all contracts entered into by merchants with the is defendant and covered by the agreement in consideration of the plaintiffs receiving certain rates of commission, that the plaintiffs deposited a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 for the due performance by them of. the terms of their agreement with the 1st defendant, that a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1925All787
Sulaiman, J.1. The preliminary question raised on behalf of the respondents is that the valuation of this appeal is improper. The appeal arises out of a suit for dissolution of partnership which was valued by the plaintiffs for purposes of jurisdiction at Rs. 4,500. The plaintiffs claimed that the partnership may be dissolved and that the defendants may be made to render an account and they asked for a decree for Rs. 4,500 and interest thereon or for any sum which may on account be found due. The Court of first instance found that the partnership had been dissolved more than three years before the suit and the claim was barred by limitation. It accordingly dismissed the suit in due. The plaintiffs appealed to the District Judge who took the view that the partnership had not been dissolved on the date of the filing of the suit. He also found that all the defendants were liable as partners. He accordingly reversed the decree of the first Court and directed that a decree be drawn up under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1925Cal822,(1925)ILR52Cal721
Walmsley, J.1. The question referred is whether the provisions of Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code are applicable to an enquiry under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The difficulty arises from the requirement that the deposition of each witness should be read over to him in the presence of the accused, if in attendance, or of his pleader, if he appears by pleader, and the question for our decision becomes nothing more than this, viz., whether persons against whom proceedings under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code have been initiated are accused within the meaning of Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The word ' accused ' is one of the words that have not been defined in any statute. Our attention has been drawn to various decisions in which a definition has been attempted. For the purpose for which those decisions were given they may be accepted as correct; but I do not think it necessary to consider whether the definition may be regarded as s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1925Bom485; (1925)27BOMLR973
Shah, Ag. C.J.1. It will be convenient in this case to state the few facts which have given rise to this appeal. The Divisional Forest Officer, Western Division, Thana, by a proclamation dated June 25. 1920, invited tenders with reference to certain forest coupes in the Thana District. The tenders were to be submitted on or before August 5, 1920, 1 P. M. The plaintiff submitted a tender in the standard form for several coupes, including coupe No. 4 in Block No. XIX before 1 P. M. on August 5. He offered to take up that particular coupe for Rs. 12,299. Immediately after, however, he discovered that he had committed a mistake in that the sum offered was not intended for that particular coupe but for coupe No. 5, which was near coupe No. 4. At 4-30 on that day the plaintiff's son sent a petition requesting the officer not to sanction the tender for coupe No. 4 as it was submitted under a mistake. The plaintiff 'and his son also sent a telegram' which reached the Divisional Forest Officer ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1925)27BOMLR855
Shaw, J.1. The Courts below agreed. The question which arises has reference to the taxation upon sugar and the point involved is represented to be of very great general importance to all mercantile communities in India which deal with that article.2. Their lordships are satisfied that both the Courts below have come to a just conclusion.3. From the documents produced with the stated case it is clear that the subject of sugar taxation, and particularly the methods of its imposition, have been for some time a matter of concern to the dealers in the article and of communication with the Government of India.4. It is to be noted that in 1911 a letter was addressed by the Under Secretary to the Indian Government Department of Commerce and Industry to the Secretary of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce at Calcutta. The letter noted previous correspondence and in particular that it had been represented by the Karachi Chamber of Commerce supported by the Bengal and Bombay Chambers of Commerce that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1925Cal1062
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff firm, Sreelal Mangtulai, against the judgment of Mr. Justice Thornhill, which was delivered on the 20th of June 1924.2. The suit was brought under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure and was based upon five hundis, four of which were dated the 19th of May 1922, and one was dated the 23rd of May 1922. In all material respects they were in the same form; and it will be sufficient if I refer to that which is marked A. It was in these terms: ' Calcutta. 19th May 1922. (180) One hundred and eighty days after date without grace, I promise to pay to Messrs. Mitter and Sons or order the sum of rupees five thousand only for value received in cash. Sd. Mrigendra Lal Mitra.' That document appears to be in the form of an ordinary promissory note; but for some reason, which is not apparent at present, it was accepted by Mrigendra Lal Mitra on the face of the document. It was endorsed by the payees, 'Mitter and Sons.' There was a further endor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1925)ILR52Cal802
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff firm, Sreelal Mangtulal, against the judgment of Mr. Justice Thornhill which was delivered on the 20th of June 1924.2. The suit was brought under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure and was based, upon five hundis, four of which were dated the 19th of May 1922, and one was dated the 23rd of May 1922. In all material respects they were in the same form; and, it will be sufficient if I refer to that which is marked A. It was in these terms: 'Calcutta, 19th May 1922. One hundred and eighty days after date without grace I promise to pay to Messrs. Mitra and Sons or order the sum of rupees five thousand, only for value 'received in cash, Sd. Mrigendra Lal Mitra.' That document appears to be in the form of an ordinary promissory note; but for some reason, which is not apparent at present, it was accepted by Mrigendra Lal Mitra on the face of the document. It was endorsed by the payees, 'Mitra and Sons'. There was a further endorsem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
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 of 101 bales of bed-sheets, which were 'bunto' goods, and were to be delivered between November 1920 and February 1921. The original plaintiffs, when the suit was filed on January 19, 1922, were the present second plaintiffs, Messrs. Keshavji Manekchand & Co, They are the sailing agents of the present first plaintiffs, the Coorla Spinning and Weaving Company, Limited, who were added as co-plaintiffs by my order of March 26, 1924.2. It is common ground that on November 19, 1920, the defendants took delivery of six out of the 10] bales and paid for the same. The plaintiffs' case is that at the instance of one Mohanlal Anandji, who was a partner of the defendants or who was acting on their behalf, they gave time to the defendants as regards the balance of the goods, and agreed that the defendants should take delivery in one lot of all ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1925Cal716,90Ind.Cas.426
Suhrawardy, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal (No. 180 of 1924) and the S.A. No. 1016 of 1924 are directed against the same decision of the Court below. There is also an application under Section 115, C.P.C., filed by the appellant against the same order. The explanation is that in the present unsettled state of the law the appellant could not decide on the proper procedure.2. The Miscellaneous Appeal was first heard and the learned Advocate for the respondent took a preliminary objection on the ground that no appeal lay. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent; brought a suit for recovery of the valve of certain goods which he had despatched, from one railway station to another on the Bengal Nagpur Railway but the goods were not delivered to the consignee. He accordingly raised the presents suit and in the plaint filed the name of the defendant was given as 'Agent of the Bengal Nagpur Railway Saheb Bahadur.' The defendant Mr. Young who was the Agent of the Bengal Nagpur R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1925)ILR52Cal783
Suhrawardy, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal (No. 180 of 1924) and the S. A. No. 1016 of 1924 are directed against the same decision of the Court below. There is also an application under Section 115, C. P. C, filed by the appellant against the same order. The explanation is that in the present unsettled state of the law the appellant could not decide on the proper procedure.2. The Miscellaneous Appeal was first heard and the learned Advocate for the respondent took a preliminary objection on the ground that no appeal lay. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff respondent brought a suit for recovery of the value of certain goods which he had despatched from one railway station to another on the Bengal Nagpur Railway but the goods were not delivered to the consignee. He accordingly raised the present suit and in the plaint filed the name of the defendant was given as ' Agent of the Bengal Nagpur Railway Saheb ' Bahadur'. The defendant, Mr. Young, who was the Agent of the Bengal Nagp...
Tag this Judgment!