Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

CASE BREIF : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. v. Municipal Commissioners of Pur, Summaries of Civil Law

• This is an appeal filed by the plaintiff against the trial court's ruling dismissing the plaintiff's lawsuit. For the previous 14 years, the plaintiff had been producing rice and oil under the brand name "R. N. Bishnachandra." Purulia received a shipment of pure mustard oil from the plaintiff in a cylindrical van.

Typology: Summaries

2023/2024

Uploaded on 04/07/2024

rakshita-jain-2
rakshita-jain-2 🇮🇳

1 document

1 / 3

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
CASE BREIF : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. v.
Municipal Commissioners of Purulia Municipality
CITATION: AIR 1926 Pat. 258, 12 Bom. 490
COURT : Patna High Court
BENCH :
Hon’ble Justice Fazl Ali and Hon’ble Justice Verma
PARTIES
PETITIONER : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd.
RESPONDENT: Municipal Commissioners of Purulia Municipality
DECIDED ON:
26th March, 1943
FACTS
This is an appeal filed by the plaintiff against the trial court's ruling dismissing the
plaintiff's lawsuit. For the previous 14 years, the plaintiff had been producing rice
and oil under the brand name "R. N. Bishnachandra." Purulia received a shipment of
pure mustard oil from the plaintiff in a cylindrical van.
Approximately one thousand canisters of oil were filled and delivered to customers
in accordance with the agreement on May 3, 1938.
Following the delivery of the 100 tins to the defendant on May 4, 1938, he filed a
case under Section 287 of the Municipal Act, claiming the oil was tainted with
kerosene and smelled bad.
The plaintiff argued that the defendant's accusations were baseless and untrue, and
that the oil was pure and intended for ingestion by humans.
After the oil samples were examined by a chemical analyst, the sanitary inspector
determined that the oil was authentic. The plaintiff claimed that he suffered
significant losses as a result of the defendant's actions.
pf3

Partial preview of the text

Download CASE BREIF : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. v. Municipal Commissioners of Pur and more Summaries Civil Law in PDF only on Docsity!

CASE BREIF : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. v.

Municipal Commissioners of Purulia Municipality

CITATION: AIR 1926 Pat. 258, 12 Bom. 490 COURT : Patna High Court BENCH : Hon’ble Justice Fazl Ali and Hon’ble Justice Verma PARTIES PETITIONER : Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. RESPONDENT: Municipal Commissioners of Purulia Municipality DECIDED ON: 26 th March, 1943 FACTS  This is an appeal filed by the plaintiff against the trial court's ruling dismissing the plaintiff's lawsuit. For the previous 14 years, the plaintiff had been producing rice and oil under the brand name "R. N. Bishnachandra." Purulia received a shipment of pure mustard oil from the plaintiff in a cylindrical van.  Approximately one thousand canisters of oil were filled and delivered to customers in accordance with the agreement on May 3, 1938.  Following the delivery of the 100 tins to the defendant on May 4, 1938, he filed a case under Section 287 of the Municipal Act, claiming the oil was tainted with kerosene and smelled bad.  The plaintiff argued that the defendant's accusations were baseless and untrue, and that the oil was pure and intended for ingestion by humans.  After the oil samples were examined by a chemical analyst, the sanitary inspector determined that the oil was authentic. The plaintiff claimed that he suffered significant losses as a result of the defendant's actions.

 The defendant contended that the plaintiff had not incurred any losses and that the plaintiff had no right to sue him for damages simply because the chemical analyst had not discovered any impurities in the oil. ISSUES

  1. Whether the action of the municipality was just and reasonable in seizure of mustard oil?
  2. Whether the plaintiff company suffer loss in the business and reputation due to arbitrary, malafide and malicious action of the defendants?
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages if so how much?
  4. What amount the plaintiff is entitled to get on account of mustard oil and canisters? ARGUMENTS RATIO DECENDI The judge's decision based on the facts of the material facts that the judge creates law is known as the ratio decidendi of a case. It also refers to the facts that the judge has determined to be material facts of the case. Ratio Decidendi, then, is equal to Material Facts + Decision. The High Court in this instance took into consideration the relevant facts that
    1. The plaintiff shipped the defendants pure mustard oil, which the chemical analyst verified through testing.