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

2013 Supreme(HP) 907

RAJIV SHARMA
Doon Tempo Operators Union – Appellant
Versus
Arihant Industries Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sanjeev Kuthiala, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Devyani Sharma, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Rajiv Sharma, J. - This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.10.2006 passed by learned District Judge, Solan, camp court at Nalagarh, District Solan in Civil Appeal No. 25-NL/13 of 2006.

2. "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondents/plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as the "plaintiffs" for convenience sake) filed a suit against the appellant/defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant" for convenience sake) for recovery of Rs. 1,66,376/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant is stated to be a common carrier engaged in business of transporting for hire property from place to place for general public having its head office at Baddi. Plaintiff No.2, M/s. Arihant Industries Limited, on 20.5.1999 booked goods for transportation by road, namely, 2500 kgs of yard rolled on cones and packed in card board boxes with the defendant from its factory at Baddi to be delivered at M/s. Arihant Yarn Agencies, Delhi. The booking was made through goods receipt No. 446 dated 20.5.1999












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