Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, P.KRISHNA KUMAR
V. Chandran S/O. Vasudevan – Appellant
Versus
Aliamma George W/O.K.V.George – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. damage claim for breach of contract. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. limitations for contractual breach claims. (Para 8 , 11) |
| 3. judgment of dismissal. (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The suit for damages for breach of a contract was dismissed by the trial court. The plaintiff is in appeal.
3. The defendants, while admitting Ext.A1 agreement, contended that Ext.A1 agreement had been performed in its entirety and that on such completion, on 01.10.2000, yet another agreement was entered into between the parties as Ext.B4 for removal of the trees in yet another property belonging to the defendants. They alleged suppression of such fact by the plaintiff. They prayed for dismissal of the suit.
5. We have heard Smt.Hemalatha, the learned counsel on behalf of the appellant and Sri. R. Sudhir, the learned counsel for the respondents.
(i) Is the plaint claim barred by limitation?
7. Ext.A1 agreement is dated 06.08.1998. Under Ext.A1, the period fixed for performance was one year from 01.09.1998. The said period expired on 01.09.1999. The plaintiff claims that on 03.10.2000 the agreement was extended for a further period of six months ie. up to 03.04.2001. Alleging breach on the part of the defen
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
