Yahoo India Web Search

Search results

  1. Dec 1, 2021 · FACTS. In 1934, the plaintiff (Mr. Gajanan Moreshwar Parelkar) and the BMC had a lease agreement for a period of 999 years, whereby BMC gave the plaintiff a particular piece of land in exchange for the lease amount. The defendant (Mr. Moreshwar Madan Mantri) then asked the plaintiff to transfer the benefit of that lease to him.

  2. Bombay High Court. Gajanan Moreshwar Parelkar vs Moreshwar Madan Mantri on 1 April, 1942. Equivalent citations: (1942)44BOMLR703, AIR 1942 BOMBAY 302. JUDGMENT. Chagla. J. 1. This is a suit by the plaintiff to enforce an indemnity.

  3. ANALYSIS OF GAJANAN MORESHWAR PARELKAR V. MORESHWAR MADAN MANTRI (1942) 44 BOMLR. 703 & INSIGHT ON THE COMMENCEMENT OF LIABILITY UNDER THE CONTRACT OF INDEMNITY Mr. Parthik Choudhury, B.B.A. LL.B., Army Law College, Pune, Maharashtra-412106 ABSTRACT Contract act was usually formulated and implemented by the British in India,

  4. Jan 15, 2012 · FACTS: Plaintiff (P) got a plot of land on lease from municipal corp. of Mumbai. P allowed Defendant (D) to erect building on that land. D, in this course, incurred debt of Rs.5ooo from building material supplier (K), twice.

  5. Jan 8, 2024 · Gajanan Moreshwar Parelkar vs Moreshwar Madan Mantri on 1 April, 1942. Facts: 1. The plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Municipal Corporation for the City of Bombay in 1934 to lease a plot of land (No. 226A of the Dadar Matunga Estate) for 999 years. 2.

  6. Mr. Tendolkar contends that until the mortgagee files a suit against the plaintiff and obtains judgment which the plaintiff is compelled to satisfy the plaintiff is not entitled to sue the defendant.

  7. People also ask

  8. This case analysis discusses the 1942 case Gajanan Moreshwar Parelkar v. Moreshwar Madan Mantri. It involves a dispute over land that was mortgaged multiple times by the plaintiff at the request of the defendant to pay suppliers.