SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1960 Supreme(SC) 239

RAGHUBAR DAYAL, SYED JAFAR IMAM, A.K.SARKAR
Purushottam Umedbhai And Company – Appellant
Versus
Manilal And Sons – Respondent


Advocates:
B.B.IYENGAR, D.N.MUKHERJI, N.C.CHATTERJI

Judgment

IMAM, J. : These are appeal by special leave against the order of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated December 18, 1958, setting aside the order of P. B. Mukherjea, J. dated February 8, 1957, whereby he rejected the petition of the respondent for amendment of the plaint, filed in Suit No. 1452 of 1951 in the High Court, in exercise of its Ordinary Original Civil jurisdiction.

2. The plaint in Suit No. 1452 of 1951 was filed in the name of Manilal & Sons, a firm carrying on business at No. 11A, Malacca Street, Singapore. The partners of this firm were five in number. They were (1) Manubhai Maganbhai Amin (2) Pravinbhai Dahyabhai Patel (3) Gangabhai Ishwarbhai Patel (4) Bachubhai Manibhai Amin and (5) Dahyabhai Trikambhai. The defendant was the firm of Purushottam Umedbhai & Co. (now the appellant) - a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 - carrying on business at No. 55 Canning Street, Calcutta. In July 1949 there was a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant under which the defendant was to sell to the former, subject to certain conditions, 950 bales of Heavy Cees gunny bags c. i. f. Singapore to be shipped from Calcutta in August 1




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top