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

1958 Supreme(Raj) 247

BAPNA
Rameshwar – Appellant
Versus
Jethabhai – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Hastimal, for Appellants; Thanchand, for Respondent

Bapna, C.J.—This is an appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Balotra, dated 6th August, 1934 in suit No. 30/50.

2. The plaintiffs-appellants are Ramkaran, his sons Bhanwarlal, Rameswar and Ramrakh and the defendant respondent is Jethabhai, son of Nensi Gujrati, resident at Bombay. The case set out by the plaintiffs in their amended plaint is that the plaintiffs were carrying on business at Karachi and became displaced persons on the formation of Dominions of India and Pakistan. It was alleged that the defendant carried on business at Bombay under the name of Nensi Deosi and there was a branch of it at Karachi. This branch came to be closed on the formation of Dominions of India and Pakistan. It was alleged that on 20th September, 1946 there was a contract between the parties by which it was agreed that the plaintiffs will give delivery of 225 bags of Khopra at a certain rate to be delivered at the end of three months from the date of contract. It was alleged that the plaintiffs offered delivery on the due date which was said 10 be 3rd January, 1947, but the defendant did not take delivery of the goods whereupon it wa















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