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

1980 Supreme(All) 438

DEOKI NANDAN
KAILASH CHANDRA AGARWAL – Appellant
Versus
SUBHASH CHAND SATISH CHAND VIYOPARI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.DAYAL, B.P.AGRAWAL, R.P.GOEL, V.Sahai

DEOKI NANDAN, J.


( 1 ) THIS is a plaintiffs second appeal in a suit for recovery of Rs. 3368. 12 P. on account of unpaid price of a wagon-load of soap-stone amounting to Rs. 3187. 62 P. Rs. 20 as expenses on travelling, Rs. 7. 50 as cost of notice and Rs. 153 as interest. The two courts below have found that the plaintiff did supply the goods to the Firm defendant-respondent No. 1, and the defendant-respondents Nos. 3 and 4, who were the proprietors and partners thereof; that the whole of the amount claimed on account of the unpaid price of a wagon of soap-stone was due and payable; but that the Agra courts had no jurisdiction inasmuch as no part of the cause of action could be said to have arisen at Agra. In arriving at the last finding and the finding that defendant-respondent No. 2 Pooran Chand, who is the father of the defendants-respondents Nos. 3 and 4, was not liable, the two courts below have found that the signatures on the Order Form, ext. 5, were not proved to be those of Pooran Chand or of any one authorised to sign it on behalf of the Firm defendant-respondent No. 1. The lower appellate court has also observed that the mere mention on the Order Form that Agra courts w








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