Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.22 seconds)The Carriers Act, 1865
Section 23 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Salem Chemical Industries, A ... vs Bird And Co. (P) Ltd., Calcutta on 5 April, 1978
The same stand has been taken in Salem Chemical Industries v. Bird & Co., AIR 1979 Mad 16 by pointing out that for such an agreement to exclude the jurisdiction of the court, the same must be clear, unambiguous and explicit.
Jaishree Luxury House, Kota And Anr. vs Kathotia Sons, Registered Partnership ... on 11 October, 1979
In Jaishree Luxury House v. Kathotia Som, AIR 1980 : Raj 42, the objection relating to jurisdiction of Court at Jaipur was negatived, as the bill of the other side has said "subject to Delhi jurisdiction" without the word 'only'.
Rai And Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs Trikamji Kanji Gajjar And Sons And Ors. on 2 November, 1973
11. To Snehalkumar now. This is a decision by Thakkar, J. (as he then was of Gujarat High Court). As this has been rendered without referring to any case law, the learned Advocate General contends that this cannot be regarded as a good law especially in view of Hakam Singh. There is great force in this submission. But it needs serious consideration whether the point raised in the judgment oppressiveness having regard to the surrounding circumstances, can be gone into keeping intact the ratio in Hakam Singh Mehta, J. of that High Court did this thinking in Rai & Sons v. Trikamji Kanji, (1975) 16 Guj LR 31 in the backdrop of Hakam Singh, which has been referred with approval in R.G. Transport Co. v. United India Insurance Co., AIR 1980 Guj 184. Mehta, J. observed as below (at P. 188) :--
Hakam Singh vs M/S. Gammon (India) Ltd on 8 January, 1971
Secondly, the English cases referred in this connection in para 7 of the judgment, are said to have regarded such an agreement as contrary to public policy, which is against the view expressed by the Supreme Court in Hakam Singh (supra).
Section 8 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Rajasthan Golden Transport Co. P. ... vs The United India Fire And General ... on 5 October, 1979
11. To Snehalkumar now. This is a decision by Thakkar, J. (as he then was of Gujarat High Court). As this has been rendered without referring to any case law, the learned Advocate General contends that this cannot be regarded as a good law especially in view of Hakam Singh. There is great force in this submission. But it needs serious consideration whether the point raised in the judgment oppressiveness having regard to the surrounding circumstances, can be gone into keeping intact the ratio in Hakam Singh Mehta, J. of that High Court did this thinking in Rai & Sons v. Trikamji Kanji, (1975) 16 Guj LR 31 in the backdrop of Hakam Singh, which has been referred with approval in R.G. Transport Co. v. United India Insurance Co., AIR 1980 Guj 184. Mehta, J. observed as below (at P. 188) :--