GUHA RAY
RANENDRA NATH PAL – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONERS OF DHULIYAN MUNICIPAL OFFICE – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS appeal by the plaintiff appellant who is a contractor arises out of a suit for recovery of money and damages instituted against the Commissioners of the Dhulian Municipality. The facts are briefly as follows: According to the plaintiff he "constructed certain work according to the plan, estimate and rates sanctioned by the defendants in a meeting and he was entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2895-10-0 from the defendants for the work done by him. The latter, however, declined to make any payment in spite of demand. He has, therefore, instituted the present suit for recovery of Rs. 2895-10-0 as the costs of the work done by him and Rs. 290/- as damages. The defence inter alia was that the suit was not maintainable as there was no contract in writing between the plaintiff and the defendants duly signed and sealed with the common seal of the defendants in connection with the alleged work. It was also the case of the defendants that the suit was liable to be dismissed as no notice of the suit as provided by Section 533, Bengal Municipal Act, 1932, was served upon the defendants by the plaintiff before the institution of the suit.
( 2 ) SO far as the facts are concerned
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.