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

1963 Supreme(AP) 46

P.SATYANARAYANA RAJU
D. P. Narasa Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Ellisetti China Venkata Subbayya – Respondent


SATYANARAYANA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition, arises out of a suit filed by the respondent, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 260. 00 towards damages for the loss of a consignment of beedies entrusted by him for transport from Proddatur to Tadipatri.

( 2 ) THE 1st defendant was impleaded in the suit as he was the owner of the public carrier and was liable to make good the loss occasioned to the plaintiff by the non-delivery of the goods entrusted to the 2nd defendant, who was at the material time, his driver.

( 3 ) THE facts which are material for the purpose of appreciating the points raised before me can be briefly stated. The plaintiff is the owner of a motor lorry and is a resident of Proddatur. The 1st defendant is also a resident o Proddatur and is the owner of the motor lorry A P D 625. The and defendant was in the employ of the first defendant, at the material time as his driver. Messrs. Syed Trading Company are the manufacturers of a brand of beedies, known as Gopuram Beedies, having their place of business at Washemanpet, Madras.

( 4 ) A merchant of Proddatur, by name, Rangarao, placed an order with Messre. Syed Trading Company for the supply of two bags of Gopuram Beed
















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