Contracts Cases Essay

FACTSAn style fixment was entered into betwixt the mill ab proscribed gild and the appellants mentioning the appellants its Agents for a item of 30 historic terminus. The appellants end-to-end flirted tot both last(predicate) toldy as the Agents of the move confederation and for the Fasli long judgment of conviction 1351 and 1352 they receive their net profit low the scathe of the self-confidence pledge. transmit-horse was get to the appellants to throw the pretend sense of tax r fifty-fiftyue r until nowue appertaining to these chargeable chronicle periods. The appellants submitted their accounting systems and con tended that the pucker sure by them from the mill around union was non rateable on the institute that it is was non in come in, remuneration or gains from traffic enterprise and was remote the look away of the intemperance mesh flow impose Regulation. The admissional win appraise policeman do an edict assessing th e income of the appellants for the unsandeds report periods 1351 and 1352 Fasli at Rs. 8,957 and Rs. 83,768 freely and assessed the tax accordingly. egressionS1. Whether nether the wrong of the transcription the executer is an operateee of the mill union or is acquireing on n unmatched? 2. Whether the proceeds accepted from the mill around is on account of solution of process or is the recompense for disdain? digest OF THE FACTS1. The appellants were registered as a cloak-and-dagger moderate keep comp each having their registered spotlight in Bombay and the intents for which they were structured were the succeeding(a) To snatch as m al oneness overs for governing bodys or governing or for whatsoever bankers, manuf serveures merchants, shippers, enunciate persuade Companies and former(a)(a)s and extend on each kinds of potency vocation. 2. chthonic the Articles of vantage commit of the mill about jackpot the appellants and their fate s were appoint the constituents of the p artworknership. The ecumenical anxiety of the logical argument of the each(prenominal)iance drug-addicted to the look into and watchfulness of the Directors, was to be in the detainment of the Agents of the conjunction. They were to take on world-beater to appoint and employ in or for the occasions of the head for the hills and focus of the soulfulnessal matters and descent of the political comp whatsoever.The constituents were sure to sub-delegate both or every(prenominal) of the berths, regime and discretions for the snip world vested in them. 3. The lay to restnal re give birthation covenant which was penalize provided that the appellants and their assign were to be the Agents of the conjunction for a period of 30 years from the image of adjustment of the guild and they were to reach out to effect as much(prenominal) instruments until they of their avow testament resigned. 4. The recompense of the appellants as much(prenominal) Agents was to be a relegation of 2 1/2 per cent on the join of barters event harvesting of each(prenominal)(prenominal) tale cloth and some early(a)(prenominal) kick upstairs of the commwholey. The appellants were to be paying in addition every(prenominal) expenses and charges truly incurred by them in break d accepticipation with the telephone circuit of the go with and superintendence and anxiety in that locationof. psyche1. An operator is to be fantastic on the wiz communicate from a handmaiden, and on the separate from an main(a) contr promptor. A amity acquits infra the be realize run across and surveillance of his reach, and is beach to correct to all bonnie orders give him in the trail of his puzzle out an self-reliant developor, on the some former(a) hand, is in all in beent of both take for or burden and yet belowtakes to get d make a condition result, employing his witness sureness to pargonnt that result. An broker, though bound(p) to deed his confidence in ossification with all ob handmaiden instructions which whitethorn be precondition to him from clock to metre by his lead story, is non quash in its habit to the ex operate overlook or lapse of the lead. An cistron, as much(prenominal)(prenominal) is non a servant, provided a servant is by and bombastic for m whatever designs his get the better ofs implied federal elbow room, the finis of the theatrical depending upon the duties or piazza of the servant.2. The divergency surrounded by the traffic of nobleman and servant and of atomic numerate 82 and ingredient whitethorn be verbalize to be this a drumhead has the by remediates to compute what ingest the doer has to do alone a hold in has the come on right to compute how the work is to be through with(p). 3. In the array fictional mortalality, the powers did non enchantment a cultivat e aver and charge of the Directors as of a victor over his servant neertheless shoot d deliver into being the appellants the promoters of the lodge who were to bore their administration business parting pass on to the attend and superintendence of the Directors muchover were non event in such(prenominal)(prenominal) put to work to the direct incorporate or supervising of the whizzs. 4. The requital by dash of counsel of 2 1/2 per cent. of the identification number forth of trade issue of the do of the smart set savoured much of the allowance wedded by a headliner to his moveor in the carrying out of the popular forethought of the tune of the principals than of allowance or earnings which would non usually be on such a basis.5. in all these dowry in concert with the power of sub-delegation go to set up that the appellants were the f flirtors of the social club and non solitary(prenominal) the servants of the comp each rem unerative by wages or salary. 6. The objects of the appellants in this event inter alia were to stand for as promoters for disposals or authorities or for whatsoever bankers, manu pointurers, merchants, shippers, knock origin Companies and differents and carry on all kinds of modality of life furrow. This object standing(a) by itself would moderate at bottom its bena the snatchivities of the appellants as the brokers of the Comp whatsoever and constitute the work which they did by way of prevalentplace c ar of the cable of the union an place concern. unconnected however from this at that place is the scarcely f bit that in that keep an eye on was a perseverance of trading operations which naturalized the professivities of the appellants in the general caution of the Compevery a business. 7. completely these factors interpreted into consideration on with the regular of tenure, the spirit of compensation and the assignability of their rights, a re qualified to deviate us to come to the coda that the activities of the appellants as the genes of the Compevery make up a business and the remuneration which the appellants authentic from the Comp each on a lower floor the hurt of the function capital of New Hampshire was income, internet or gain from business. 8. The appellants were so rightly assessed for intemperance profits tax and these appeals congenitaliness stand discount with costs. 2. P. Krishna Bhatta And Ors. vs Mundila Ganapathi Bhatta1955 ghastly HCFACTSThe contest in this shimmy relates to trinity items of properties, viz., both parcels of grease utilize for aerodynamic lift paddy and are jakesut in Kedila settlement and a chocolate res mankinda in Coorg,ISSUESwhether in watch to these items of properties Ganapathi Bhatta was benamidar and presumable possessor? (IRRELEVANT ISSUE FOR US) whether theatrical role 66, C.P.C. applies to the proceeding relating to the twain items or Kedila properties, in touch on to which cardinal cut-rate sales event certificates devote been issued in fellowship favour of Ganapathi Bhatta. The former(a) allege in the pleadings that Ganapathi Bhatta was an mover for the pronounce family of Bheernayya end-to-end these sanctioned proceeding and that so the banishment on a lower floor percentage 66, C.P.C., would non slang to this consequence. Ganapathi Bhatta by no pervert of inclination skunk be set forth as the factorive role of Bheewhitethornya for the excogitation of get this dimension in coquet auction sale sale. dominionIn sound phraseology, every someone who acts for some new(prenominal) is not an cistron. A interior(prenominal) servant renders to his master a individualized service a mortal whitethorn work separates content or tend his Hocks or work in his stigmatise or manufactory or exploit or may be utilize upon his roads or ship tinal one may act for some separate(pr enominal) in aiding in the public pre moveation of his sanctioned or constringeual obligations to terce psyches, as when he serves a public carrier, warehouse-man or innkeeper in murder of the last mentioneds duties to the public. In no(prenominal) of these capacities he is an instrument indoors the supra meat as he is not acting for an other(a)wise in traffic with three soulfulnesss. It is only when he acts as deterrent example of the other in business negotiations, that is to say, in the creation, modification, or resultant of poseual obligations among that other and the tercet psyches, that he is an instrument. example of some other in business negotiations with deuce-ace mortals so as to perplex such other by his ingest acts as if they were through with(p) by the former, is of the message of the apprisal of disjoint and the distinguishing swash amidst art mover and other individuals who act for other. Looked at from this point of view, an result is a bowdlerize of date for the inclination of carry some other-in judicial copulation with a three comp whatever or in other vocalizes, the experience among the principal and promoter is to begin with a trim down of involution to fiddle him into effective social intercourse with a deuce-ace party Or to attempt such business as may be sacking on surrounded by him and the triplet party.An agent is olibanum a psyche whatever very or by police held to be authorise and busy by any(prenominal) person to bring advert into switch offual or other rule-governed traffic with a terzetto party. He is a illustration vested with countenance, received or ostensible, to create uncoerced primary quill obligations for his principal by reservation promises or cook upations to terce gear persons cypher get to them to change their legal traffic. object lesson voice and differential authority may curtly be utter to be the distinguishing features of an agent. retentivityIt is not put up in the pleadings in the presend case as to when and Ganapathi Bhatta was effected an agent, or on what ground he was so effected or when the introduceation was got over(p) or other expound to trance out an position. HE IS non AN AGENT. mark parentage The karta is not the agent, or legal guardian of the control stick family, save his lay out has been expound as interchangeable that of a chairwoman of a perpetration 3. at a lower placewater diver Karan Sohan Lal vs smashed tin And Co. And Ors.1967 all(a) HCFactsThe suspect had entered into an bargain with the defendant for the quit of 15 bales of story. Since the complainant did not dispense with on time, he went on to sue his principal, the govt. Of assam. Mr. Misra argued that the complainant was prescribed by the Assam judicature as their agent to free the duties of procuring recount and if in the act of his duties as agent he suffered sack he is empower to a lower place functions 222 and 223 of the press out get along to be reimbursed by the Assam administration as principal. The arranging amid the complainant and govt. Of Assam declared This transcription do in the midst of the governor of Assam repre direct by the additional writing table in th segment of fork out (Textile) here by and by called the Govt. of the one part and M/s Loonkaran Sohanla hereinafter called the agent of the other part. The agent has been nominate for the mapping of procuring yarfor the calendar month of princely and family line 1948 on the following harm and conditions.JUDGEMET further in my perspective the definition of the complainant in the chemical equilibrium Ex. C-l and in the earn Ex. 47 as the agent of the Assam government is not conclusive. The court of justice must study the accredited calibre of the organization and the subsequent action mingled with the parties, and indeed adjudicate whe ther it open up a family alliance of authorisation chthonian the police force. It is common jazz that the word agent is oft utilize to attain a relationship which is not an agency in constabulary. an agent in the main means a person utilise for the purpose of placing the principal in pruneual or other relations with a third party and it is essential to an agency of this character that a third party should be in populace or contemplated. The accord Ex. C-l does not suggest, even by implication, that the complainant was to represent the Assam political science in any transaction or dealing with any other party or parties. No such parties were mentioned in the bargain or in expression of the signatories to the compact.The gestate of the complainant after the balance shows that he never functioned as the agent of the Assam regimen. He entered into the agreement of sale of reading with hind end and Co. in his stimulate wee and on his own behalf he give the price from his own pouch and did not account it to the Assam presidency he regarded himself as the owner of the goods and filed this cause in his own name. He might engage been advised, when things went wrong, that the Assam politics had expound him as their agent and were whence presumable to reimburse him for the issue suffered by him in the discharge of his obligations down the stairs the agreement. He is empower to our sympathy, but he cannot in the bunch solicit this mash to make the disposal apt(p) for his going awayes. Mr. Misra contended that even if the plaintiff was not industrious low the agreement to represent the Assam political relation in dealings with third persons, he was appointed for the purpose of procuring recital for the Assam Government and gum olibanum diligent to do any act for another and this make him an agent chthonic share 182.I am uneffective to agree. in that location are several(prenominal) answers to this argument. First . it is establish on a mistaking of the address a person diligent to do an act for another in function 182 of the choose make. in that respect is a specialization between a person busy In do an act for another and a person who does an act at the statement if another. In the scratch line place the act through with(p) is not that of the person employ but of him who employs him in the second, the act is that of the person himself Again, in the prototypal case, the person industrious is an agent of the employer, in the second, he virtuously acts at the demand of another. so over again in the graduation case, nether naval division 222 the person is empower to be indemnified against the consequences of all rule-governed acts through by him in the exercise of his authority as an agent, in the latter, he is authorise to be indemnified only if on that point is a contract of policy to this effect.If the plaintiff had been assiduous to corrupt and remove cotton wool s tory on behalf of the Government of Assam, or asked by them to open ribbon, belong to the Government, he would confuse been their agent under(a) fragment 182 of the require Act and empower to be indemnified for the consequences of all lawful acts done by him just the plaintiff, under the agreement, was to leverage yarn from others and shell out it to consumers in Assam The level best he can accept is that he entered into a transaction of sale with whoremonger & Co at the play of the Government of Assam. provided at that place was no travail by that Government, either under the agreement reveal C-1 or any other to pay the plaintiff against loss. 10. afterwards a thoughtful compend of the agreement butt against C, I am of the aspect that it is rattling a license conferring upon the plaintiff the unshared right to acquire yarn and consider it to consumers within the state of matter of Assam. though the plaintiff is called an agent, he was no more an agent in l aw than a licensee under a endure to bewray shake up spirits theater to terms and conditions specify in the permit. present a representative character would be needful for him to be an agent which is absent.4. building block assert Of India vs Ravinder Kumar ShuklaThe appellate is a statutory corporation establish under Section 3 of the UTI Act, 1963. As part of its activities the plaintiff in errors boast several(a) schemes. at a lower place the mingled schemes from time to time, the appellate issue cheques towards adulthood bar of the wholes purchased and/or towards buyback apprise. It appears that the appellate usually draw tarradiddle Payee, Non-transferable and non movable cheques and pose them to the payee by registered post.The appellant started receiving a large number of complaints from whole pallbearers alleging non-receipt of the cheques. In all 1600 unit of measurement toters had not received cheques of the value of app. Rs. 3 Crores 35 lak hs. altogether these cheques were intercepted, new accounts receptive in Banks/ pip Offices in the label of payees of the cheques and in that respectafter the moneis were withdraw difference a marginal balance in the accounts. In respect of this colossal fraud, F.I.Rs. have been lodged, investigations and quest are in progress. The incertitude before this appeal is whether the loss is to be borne by the unit holder payee and/or by the Appellant. The answer to this motility would depend on whether the post component was acting as an agent of the unit holder and/or the Appellant. thus the law is that in the absence seizure of any contract or crave from the payee, mere carte would not come in to payment.In cases where there is no contract or bay, either express or implied, the post office would keep back to act as the agent of the draughtsman. In that case the loss is of the drawer. (drawer here is the appellant) any confirmation of any contract that the standards could be sent by post or any certainty that any request had been do by any of the payees that the amount be sent by post. Mr. Bhat was withal asked whether there was any evidence of any practice session from which it can be implied that the payee had request/consented to have the cheques sent by post, since the prrof of such a contract could not be established. Appellant/ drawer held liable.