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

1964 Supreme(Bom) 78

D.V.PATEL, V.D.TULZAPURKAR
Navinchandra Jethabhai and Anr – Appellant
Versus
Moolchand Sadaram Gindodiya – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Patel, J.

[1 - 15] XX XX XX XX XX

(16) The next question is whether the suit is barred by time. The court below has applied Article 115 o the Limitation Act which is for compensation for the Brach of any contract, express or implied, not in writing registered and not there specially provided for. It the suit were not only for damages for the breach of the contract of partnership, this Article would indeed apply, though the important question would be that of the starting point of the period. The third column which regulation would be that of the starring point provides that the time shall run from the date the contract is broken and in the case of the successive breached when the breach finally ceases. A suit for account and share of profits of a dissolved partnership is governed by Article 106 which provides a period of three years fro the date of dissolution of the partnership.

The learned Judge in Paragraph 43 of the his judgment has observed that the time commenced to the run from the 28th of April 1953, because the plaintiff admitted in this cross - examination - matter went wrong between in us since 28th April 1953. Since the said date disputes arose between the pa




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