Court: Supreme Court of India Full Case Name: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd Date Decided: 12 October, 2007 Citations: Appeal (civil) 4829 of 2007 Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, D.K. Jain Appellant: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Limited Respondent: The Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited Background: M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited is a Government of India Undertaking, under the administrative control of the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas and is engaged in refining, distributing and selling of petroleum products all over the country. The respondent M/s. Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited is engaged in the business…
Author: Patil Rushikesh
Court: Supreme Court of India Full Case Name: Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia vs. M/S. Girdharilal Parshottamdas Date Decided: 30th August 1965 Citations: 1966 AIR 543, 1966 SCR (1) 656 Judges: J.C. Shah, K.N. Wanchoo and M. Hidayatullah. Appellant: Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia Respondent: Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co. & Ors. Facts: On July 22nd 1959, Kedia Ginning Factory and Oil Mills (appellant) of Khamgaon entered into a contract over telephone to supply cotton seed cakes to M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas and Co. (respondents) of Ahmedabad. The respondents commenced an action against the appellant in the City Civil Court of Ahmedabad for failing to supply cotton…
Court: House of Lords Full Case Name: Rose & Frank Co v. Crompton Bros Date Decided: 17th December 1906 Citations: (1925) AC 445 Appellant: Crompton Bros Respondent: Rose & Frank Company Facts: An American organization and English organization went into a sole office agreement in 1913 for the offer of paper products in the USA. The composed agreement contained a condition specifying that it was anything but a formal nor lawful agreement, and a “Honourable pledge” between colleagues. Hence, the American organization set requests for paper which were acknowledged by the British organization. Before the requests were satisfied, the British…
Court: Allahabad High Court Full Case Name: Khwaja Muhammad Khan V. Husaini Begum Date Decided: 17th December 1906 Citations: (1907) ILR 29 All 222 Judges: Bench: J Stanley, W Burkitt Appellant: Muhammad Rustam Ali Khan Respondent: Husaini Begam Facts: The plaintiff, namely Husaini Begam, who was a Mohammedan lady, married the son of the defendant, namely Khwaja Muhammad Khan. As per Islamic customs the plaintiff was to be given Rs. 500 as Kharch-i-Pandan. The agreement was enforced by the defendant at the time of marriage. The agreement was to be initiated after her reception into conjugal domicile, which started 6…
Court: Madras High Court Full Case Name: Chinnaya V. Rammaya (1882) Date Decided: 21st October 1987 Citations: ILR (1876-82) 4 Mad 137 Judges: Innes J, Kindersley J Appellant: Venkata Chinnaya Respondent: Venkata RamayyaGaru Facts: A lady granted/ gifted a property consisting of some land to her daughter (defendant) by a gift deed. The deed was registered to the proper authorities. One of the terms of the deed was that the daughter had to pay a sum of Rs.653 annually. Later the old lady died, and the defendant refused to pay the money the sister whom she had promised to pay…
The Indian constitution has provided citizens with many rights to protect their individual interests. But due to the complexity of the constitution very few people know their rights let alone understand them which often leads to facing various difficulties and getting in trouble in their day to day life. Here is a list of 15 laws and rights that every Indian must know: Indian Sarais Act, 1887: Every citizen has a fundamental right to drink water and using washroom in any hotel or restaurants even the 5 star hotels can’t prohibit you from drinking water or using washroom in their…
Court: Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Full Case Name: Louisa Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Date Decided: 8th December 1892 Citations: [1892] EWCA Civil 1, [1893] 1 QB 256 Judges: Lindley LJ, Bowen LJ And AL Smith LJ Prior Actions: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1892] 2 QB 484 Defendant: Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Brief Facts Summary: The plaintiff believing the advertisement in a newspaper stating the use of the smoke ball would prevent the influenza and flu. She used the smoke ball as prescribed in the advertisement for some time and still had an attack of influenza.…
