Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • ss. 69 and 70 of the Contract Act
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • ss. 69 and 70 of the Contract Act

    Dost Muhammad v. Sanjad Ahmad

    Strhight, Offg. C.J and Tyrrell, J.:— The views expressed by the Judge as to the legal position of the plaintiff are sound in point of law, and he rightly reversed the Sub-ordinate Judge's decision. There was no provision in the contract of sale by which the vendor covenanted to recoup the vendee for any payment he might have to make for arrears of revenue, and no relations existed between them from which any obligation of the character mention in ss. 69 and 70 of the Contract Act could be implied as attaching to the vendor. The application is refused.

    Application dismissed.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Dost Muhammad v. Sanjad Ahmad
    (Aug 20, 1883)