Law:

Section:

(a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)- -- S. 73-Breach of contract-Tender for Government contract Plaintiff-respondent admitting in plaint to have desired to tender for work in question but due to his pre-occupation submitted an application alongwith a call deposit, and further instructed to procure tender personally if he could come back in time but he could not turn upon relevant date and when he came back to office to get back his money he found some body else having procured a tender form on basis of call deposit and to have filed it in his name in pursuance of a conspiracy-Plaint not naming through whom application and call deposit sent by plaintiff and also not stating person to whom such documents sent by him-Plaintiff also not proving signatures on application for tender and on tender form being not his own although he could examine a Handwriting Expert in such regard-Plaintiff failing in his duty to explain how his call deposit fell into malicious hands and person thus acting did not act under his instructions or with his concert-Plaintiff also not denying his signatures on original application and evidence in respect of such document discrepant and contradictory-Plaintiff also not denying to have signed tender form-Presence of-contractors in such situation proved to be not necessary nor any necessity for relevant documents to be signed in presence of officials of department-No evidence regarding bias or conspiracy of any person existing, presumption arises of tender form filed in ordinary course of events being filed either by plaintiff or by his blessings-Call deposit of a large amount not likely to be risked by some body else for plaintiff's benefit-Natural to assume in circumstances of plaintiff-respondent having got it all done but on second consideration of feeling contract being not profitable, filed suit claiming to have not filed any application or tender form to avoid recovery of penalty. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- -- O. XX, r. 4 & O. XLI, r. 31-Judgment-Reasons a must-No evidence in support of decision forthcoming or evidence misread or misrepresented-Absence of reasons, as required by O. XLI, r. 31 and O. XX, r. 4 to be…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492