Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)
Documents citing Durga Charan Mitra vs Rajendra Narain Sinha on 2 August, 1922

Baijnath vs Kshetrahari Sarkar And Ors. on 18 May, 1954

Then again there is no statement in the letter marked Exhibit A that any contract for lease was concluded between the parties. The letter merely says that "some terms" were discussed and definitely agreed upon between the parties. Of course, it is stated in the letter that pursuant to his letter of authority Mr. G. Mallick had induced the plaintiff to obtain a lease of the premises in question. It, however, goes without saying that Gopeswar Mullick who was acting merely as a commission agent for procuring a lessee had no authority to enter into any contract of lease with the plaintiff. Vide -- 'Durga Charan Mitra v. Rajendra Narayan Sinha', AIR 1923 Cal 57 (C). In the absence of any definite statement in Exhibit 7(a) that a contract of lease had been concluded between the parties by mutual agreement and in view of the insertion of term (9) coupled with the concluding sentence of the letter, I am of opinion that there was no binding or concluded contract between the parties on 13-12-1944.
Calcutta High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Sanwarmal Goenka vs Soumyendra Chandra Gooptu on 12 February, 1980

In the case of Durga Charan Mitra v. Rajendra Narayan Sinha, 36 Cal LJ 467 : AIR 1923 Cal 57 it was observed that the broker was to bring the purchaser and not to enter into the contract with the purchaser on behalf of the seller unless that authority was expressly given in the letter itself. That was also a case of the sale of a land for which the defedant gave a letter of authorisation which, inter alia, provided :
Calcutta High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1