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

1912 Supreme(All) 69

HENRY RICHARDS, TUDBALL
Sheo Partab Singh – Appellant
Versus
Brij Kishore – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover money. The plaintiffs allege that there was a contract between themselves and the defendants that the plaintiffs should purchase grain for the defendants and store it in their godown, that the defendants should pay interest on the outlay, make a deposit to cover losses and that the defendants should be entitled to any profits that were made upon the re-sale of the grain by the plaintiffs. The transactions between the parties commenced in the year 1902 and the last transaction was a sale on the 4th of February 1906, when there was a balance against the defendants. The suit was instituted on the 8th of February 1909. The only question argued in the appeal is whether or not the suit is barred by limitation.

2. The defendants contend that Article 61 applies and the suit was barred after three years from the time that the plaintiffs made the last purchase on their behalf. The plaintiffs, on the other hand, contend that Article 120 applies and that they have six years from the settlement of the accounts.

3. Having regard to the findings of the lower Appellate Court as to the terms of the contract between the parties, we are clearly of

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