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

1923 Supreme(All) 451

RYVES
Asghar Ali – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ryves, J. - This is a revision from the 0 order of a Special Magistrate of Moradabad ordering the applicant to return Rs. 300 in three instalments, u/s 2 of Act XIII of 1859 as amended by Act XII of 1920. which is the Workman's. Breach of Contract Act.

2. Admittedly, the applicant and the complainant in the case had executed an agreement by which the accused had undertaken to work day after day for twelve months. This agreement was dated the 22nd June 1921. The complaint was brought in November 1922 and it was brought on the ground that the total number of days that the accused worked did not amount to 365. This does not in any way seem to me to be the same as the terms of the agreement, i.e., to work every day without fail for the term of one year. The max mum, period fixed by that agreement was one calendar year and the failure to work any day during that period was a breach of the agreement on which the complainant could take action. He could therefore, take action at any time during the year which began with the agreement on the 22nd June 1921 and the period of limitation was three months from any breach of the agreement i.e., any neglect or refusal to work which took pl

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