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

1962 Supreme(AP) 161

P.CHANDRA REDDY, CHANDRASEKHARA SASTRI
Pasalapudi Brahmayya – Appellant
Versus
Teegala Gangaraju – Respondent


SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been referred to a Bench of this Court by Narasimham, J. , as it raises an important question as to the true interpretation of Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act and accordingly it has now come before us for decision.

( 2 ) THE petitioners entered into an agreement in writing with the respondent on 31-7-1954 for rendering him service as his farm watchmen for the year 1954-55. The respondent agreed to pay to the petitioners 162-1/2 kunchams of jonna grain and 225 kunchams of paddy for the year. The services were to be rendered by the 2nd petitioner and his younger brother, Koopaiah. They are the sons of the 1st petitioner. It is stipulated under the agreement that the 2nd petitioner and Koopaiah should hot absent themselves for a period exceeding 12 days in the year and that, if they absented them selves on more number of days, the 2nd petitioner should pay for the days he absented himself at the rate of Re. 1/- per day and Koopaiah at the rate of Re. 0-8-0 per day.

( 3 ) IT is the plaintiff-respondents case that the 2nd petitioner absented himself for 182 days and that, therefore he is entitled to recover Rs. 182. 00as damages as







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