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

1912 Supreme(Mad) 607

SADASIVA.AIYAR
A. M. Chokalingam Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
G. Mahomed Sheriff Saheb – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sadasiva Aiyar, J.

1. The plaintiff is the petitioner in revision. He brought this Small Cause Suit in the Nilgiri Subordinate Judges Court for the salary due to him from 1st April 1908 to 20th March 1909 at Rs. 18 a month or Rs. 216 a year. His engagement was for one year from 1st April to 31st March 1909. The Subordinate Judge has found that the plaintiff left the defendants service without justification on 20th March 1909. He also found that though the salary was fixed at Rs. 18 a month, the engagement was for one full year and his salary was agreed to be payable in a lump sum of Rs. 216 at the end of the year. On these findings, he held that according to the rule of law established by English decisions and followed in Dhumee Behara v. Sevenoaks 13 C. 80 the plaintiff lost all right to wages for the 11 months and 20 days during which he actually worked. The principle of the rule, as stated in the English cases, is that the contract must be deemed an entire indivisible contract and the performance of the services for the whole time agreed upon was in the nature of a condition precedent to the right to recover even a portion of the wages. "It is a general rule applicable to


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