Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 7]

Madras High Court

Randupurayil Kunhisow, Karnavan And ... vs Neroth Kunhi Kannan And Ors. on 4 February, 1908

Equivalent citations: (1908)18MLJ98

JUDGMENT

1. We are of opinion that Section 7 of the Act of 1887, which is reproduced as Section 19 of the Act of 1900, precludes parties from contracting themselves out of the Act by any contract made after anuary 1st, 1886, but that it does not affect the validity of contracts made prior to January 1st, 1886, whether the improvements were made before or after the coming into operation of the Act of 1887. As regerds Viru Mammad v. Krishnan (1893) I.L.R. 21 M. 149 a refeence to the printed papers shows that the contacts of the defendants other than the 6th defendant were in fact made after Janury 1st, 1886. We are unable to agree with the decision in Malikan v. Shankunni (1898) I.L.R. 13 M. 502.

2. Our answer to the question which has been referred to us is that in the case of a contract made prior to January 1st, 1886, the rate of compensation is governed by the terms of the contract.