Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 38 (0.43 seconds)

Hungerford Investment Trust Limited ... vs Haridas Mundhra & Others on 9 March, 1972

44. A similar view is echoed in Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd. v. Haridas Mundhra and others AIR 1972 SC 1826 wherein it was held that though no specific time was provided for payment of purchase money, it has to be construed as reasonable time under Section 46 of the Contract Act. The Court, however, held that what is reasonable is a question of fact. The observation of the Supreme Court reads as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 127 - K K Mathew - Full Document

Bank Of India & Anr vs K.Mohandas & Ors on 27 March, 2009

45. Learned counsel for the Corporation has relied upon Bank of India v. K. Mohandas (2009) 5 SCC 313 and Super Poly Fabriks Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Punjab (2008) 11 SCC 398 to argue that RFA 42/2017 Page 38 of 58 the contract has to be read as a whole. This position is not in dispute. However, the contract has to be construed as per the principles contained in Section 46 of the Contract Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 203 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next