NDLI: Messrs. Khimji Poonja and Company Vs. Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	East India Cotton Association bye laws Bombay Cotton Contracts Act Arbitration and award
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Arbitration Act, 1940 (10 of 1940) Bombay Cotton Contracts Act, 1932 (4 of 1932)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Bombay Cotton Contracts Act (IV of 1932), s. 8(1)—East India Cotton Association Bye-laws, Nos. 51-A, 65-A, 80, 82—Cotton Contract—Contract note stating minimum amount of deposit as Rs. 25 and not in prescribed form—Validity—Arbitration and award under arbitration clause, whether void.Section 8 of the Bombay Cotton Contracts Act, 1982, provided that contracts entered into after the date of the commencement of the Act which are not in accordance with the bye-lawa of any recognised cotton association shall be void. Bye-law 80 of the East India Cotton Association, Ltd., which was a recognised cotton association within the meaning of the Act provided that contracts between members acting as commission agents on the one hand and their constituents on the other shall be subject to the bye-laws and that a contract note in the form given in the Appendix to the bye-laws shall be rendered in respect of every _ contract. Bye-law 51-A originally required a deposit at a rate not less than Rs. 25 per Bale and the contract note accordingly contained a clause to that effect. During the war this bye-law was amended by reducing the minimum amount of deposit to Rs. 12-8 per bale and introducing a new bye-law (bye-law 65-A) which, inter alia, gave certain options to the last buyer, and by a Notification of the Government the form of the contract note was also amended by altering the minimum deposit to Rs. 123-8 and adding two new clauses to comply with the bye-law 65-A. A contract note rendered after these amendments to the bye- laws and the form of contract note, contained a rubber stamp impression in which the minimum amount of deposit was stated as Rs. 25, and did not contain the two new clauses that were introduced by the Government Notification : Held, that the contracs note rendered was not in accordance with the bye-laws and in the prescribed form as the clause relating to the minimum amount of deposit was in- consistent with the provisions of bye-law 51-A as amended, and the two new clauses had been omitted, even though the con-. tract note recited that it was made in accordance with the bye- laws, and it was accordingly void and a valid award could not be made under the arbitration clause contained in the note. [Paransart SASTRI J. preferred to rest his decision solely on the ground of the omission tio include in the contract in ques- tion the two clauses newly added in the prescribed form in order to give effect to bye-law 65-A.]
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Sudhi Ranjan Das
Neutral Citation	1950 INSC 4
Petitioner	Messrs. Khimji Poonja And Company
Respondent	Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh
SCR	[1950] 1 S.C.R. 64
Judgement Date	1950-03-14
Case Number	26

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Messrs. Khimji Poonja and Company Vs. Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh

Please Log-in to view this content

Gordhandas Purshottamdas Sonawala and Another Vs. The Eastern Cotton Company

Messrs Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay.

Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika Vs. M/s Narain Das Haribansh

Messrs. Basant Lal Banarsi Lal Vs. Bansi Lal Dagdulal

Narayan Prasad Lohia Vs. Nikunj Kumar Lohia

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Vs. R.j. Shah and Company

Shiva Jute Baling Limited Vs. Hindley and Company Limited

The Cotton Agents Ltd., Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Messrs. Godrej & Company, Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Messrs. Khimji Poonja and Company Vs. Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh

Messrs. Khimji Poonja and Company Vs. Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Gordhandas Purshottamdas Sonawala and Another Vs. The Eastern Cotton Company

Messrs Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay.

Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika Vs. M/s Narain Das Haribansh

Messrs. Basant Lal Banarsi Lal Vs. Bansi Lal Dagdulal

Narayan Prasad Lohia Vs. Nikunj Kumar Lohia

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Vs. R.j. Shah and Company

Shiva Jute Baling Limited Vs. Hindley and Company Limited

The Cotton Agents Ltd., Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Messrs. Godrej & Company, Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Messrs. Khimji Poonja and Company Vs. Shri Baldev Das C. Parikh