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

1981 Supreme(Del) 193

G.R.LUTHRA
B. B. ALU COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
SUNDERLAL AND SONS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.B.Thanai, DAYA KISHAN

G. R. Luthra

( 1 ) DEFTS. obtained a contract for the supply of fresh potatoes to Army and they entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs that the latter should make supplies on their behalf and would be entitled to collect 90% of the value of supplies made and that the balance 10% would be collected by Defts. who would deduct their commission and expenses and pay rest to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs alleging, that they were made certain payments, sued Defts. for accounts on the plea that same were known to and maintained by the Defts Defts. raised a preliminary objection that suit for accounts did not lie]. After detailing above, order proceeds.

( 2 ) THERE is no doubt and it was also common ground between the parties at the time of arguments that for the purpose of deciding maintainability of a suit only the allegations contained in the plaint are to be taken as correct. Of course, it would be different when the suit proceeds do merits. Therefore, for the purpose of deciding this issue assertions of the plaintiff are being presumed to be correct.

( 3 ) IN Narandas Morards Gajiwala v. S. P. A. M. Papammal. AIR 1967 SC 333, it is laid down that according to Section 213 of the Contract



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