Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
G. K. Mitter
PANNALAL MUKHERJEE - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Suit 4453 Of 1950
Decided On : JUNE 06, 1956
CONTRACT - Liability for payment of work done in connection with a military hospital in Dacca in 1944 - Contract entered into between the plaintiff and the Governor-General of India in Council in November 1943 - Work completed and final bill submitted in January 1946 - Plaintiff's claim that he made a mistake of fact and that his final bill did not include the cost of surfacing the floor with cement and sand mixed - Plaintiff filed suit against the defendant after the partition of India on 20th November 1950 - Defendant contended that the liability to meet the plaintiff's claim, if any, could in no circumstances fasten on his client - Court held that the contract was for purposes exclusive to the Dominion of Pakistan and the liability, if any, under the contract is that of the Dominion of Pakistan and not of the Dominion of India - Suit dismissed with costs.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff, a contractor, entered into a contract with the Governor-General of India in Council in November 1943 for work in connection with a military hospital in Dacca. The work was completed, and the plaintiff submitted his final bill in January 1946. He later discovered that he had made a mistake and that his final bill did not include the cost of surfacing the floor with cement and sand mixed. He filed suit against the defendant, the Dominion of India, after the partition of India in 1950.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the contract was for purposes exclusive to the Dominion of Pakistan and the liability, if any, under the contract is that of the Dominion of Pakistan and not of the Dominion of India. The court found that the Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947, applied to the case and that the purpose of the contract was exclusive to Pakistan.
Issues: 1. Is the liability, if any, to pay to the plaintiff that of the Dominion of Pakistan or of the defendant? 2. Was the notice served on the defendant a valid notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure? 3. Has any part of the plaintiff's cause of action for this suit arisen within the Jurisdiction of this Court? If not, has this Court jurisdiction to try this suit? 4. Did the D. C. E. Billing Centre at fort William, Calcutta, have the authority to acknowledge liability of the Government of India? If so, did the D. C. E. Billing Centre at Fort William, Calcutta, acknowledge liability of the Government of India in respect of the plaintiff's alleged claim?
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947, to determine the liability for the plaintiff's claim. The court held that the contract was for purposes exclusive to the Dominion of Pakistan and that the liability, if any, under the contract is that of the Dominion of Pakistan and not of the Dominion of India.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the suit with costs.
( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed this suit against the defendant after the partition of India on the 20th November, 1950. His case is that in or about the month of July 1947 the Governor-General in Council invited contractors having claims against the M. E. S. to notify particulars thereof to the Chief Engineer, Eastern Command, Ranchi and D. C. E. Billing Centre, Eastern Command, Port William, Calcutta and pursuant thereto the plaintiff submitted his claim which was investigated into In detail and ultimately accepted by the D. C. E. Billing Centre on or about the 31st March, 1948. The plaintiff relies on a notification alleged to have been published by the defendant on or about the 23rd May 1948 in certain newspapers calling upon contractors to submit to it claims arising whether in areas then in India or in Pakistan in respect of supplies and services rendered to the Government of India up to and inclusive of the 14th August, 1947 by the 1st of July 1948. The plaintiff avers that by the said notification the Government of India undertook to meet the claims of contractors residing in India. According to the plaint the Dominion of India thereafter illegally declined to pay the aforesaid sum of Rs. 1,36,670/- for which acknowledgment had already been made.
( 3 ) THE defendant has taken various pleas by way of defence and on the pleadings the following Issues were framed for determination:--1. Is the liability, if any, to pay to the plaintiff that of the Dominion of Pakistan or of the defendant? 2. Was the notice served on the defendant a valid notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure? 3. Has any part of the plaintiff's cause of action for this suit arisen within the Jurisdiction of this Court? If not, has this Court jurisdiction to try this suit?
( 4 ) DID the D. C. E. Billing Centre at fort William, Calcutta, have the authority to acknowledge liability of the Government of India? If so, did the D. C. E. Billing Centre at Fort William, Calcutta, acknowledge liability of the Government of India in respect of the plaintiff's alleged claim? 4. As the learned counsel for the defendant contended that the liability to meet the plaintiff's claim, if any, could in no circumstances fasten on his client, I directed that the first issue should be tried as a preliminary issue and only if the plaintiff succeeded therein would the other issues be gone into. I heard addresses at length from both sides. No oral evidence was adduced and I can proceed on the basis of the documents which are contained in the Brief of Correspondence handed up. For the purpose of considering the first issue the only relevant document is the notification of the Government of India relied on by the plaintiff.
( 5 ) MR. Mitter, learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that in law the Government of India should be held liable
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
