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

1966 Supreme(All) 527

B. DAYAL, D. D. SETH
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Nazim – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
S.C, For the Appellant / D. Sanyal, Advocate, For the Respondent

JUDGMENT

B. Dayal, J. - This is a Second Appeal by the defendant, the Union of India. The plaintiff filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,606/8/- against the Union of India alleging that from the 31st of August, 1949 to 17th of September, 1949, he had sent valuable parcels, to the addressees in Pakistan, worth Rs. 1,460/-. The addressees paid the whole amount but the Union of India failed to pay the same to the plaintiff. He,therefore, claims Rs. 1,460/- plus Rs. 246/8/- as interest thereon after giving notice under Sec. 80, C. P. C.

2. The defence taken by the Union of India was that the plaintiff did not make the claim about this amount before the 22nd of October, 1950 when it became more than one year after the parcels had been handed over to the Post Office and the claim was, therefore, barred by Rule 102 of the Indian Post Office Rules. It was contended that the Pakistan Government did not pay the money to the Union of India although the Pakistan Government had realised the amount from the addressees and consequently the Union of India was unable to pay the amount.

3. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's suit. In appeal, the lower appellate court has decreed it on the fin

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