A.S.CHANDURKAR
Rupchand son of Tukaram Giripunje – Appellant
Versus
Laxman son of Tejram Hattimare – Respondent
1. This Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short, “the Code”] has been preferred by the original defendant in the suit for permanent mandatory injunction filed by the non-applicant-plaintiff.
2. It is the case of the plaintiff that he and the defendant were residents of the same village and were sharing cordial relations. In October, 2013, they decided to purchase a JCB Machine by investing an equal amount of money. Both of them contributed a sum of Rs. 1,75,000-00 each, after which on 21st October, 2013, said machine came to be purchased. Financial assistance was also obtained by both of them by availing a loan. The machine was registered in the name of the defendant. Thereafter, on 27th November, 2014, an agreement was entered into between them agreeing to share the profits and losses from the said machine equally. According to the plaintiff, he was having a Driving License and was, therefore, operating the said machine. Though the plaintiff worked as an operator on that machine for a period of about two years, he was not paid anything by the defendant in that regard. In May, 2015, the plaintiff demanded his wages and a
Chandrayya Mutwayya Irabatti Vs. Sidram Ganpat Ingale
Helper Girdharbhai Vs. Saiyed Mohmad Mirasaheb Kadri & others
Mukund Balkrishna Kulkarni Vs. Kulkarni Powder Metallurgical Industries & another
M/s. Haldiram Bhujiawala & another Vs. M/s. Anand Kumar Deepak Kumar & another
Navinchandra Jethabhai & another Vs. Moolchand Sadaram Gindodiya
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.