The Indian Law Reports; Containing Cases Determined by the High Court at Calcutta. Calcutta Series Volume 16

The Indian Law Reports; Containing Cases Determined by the High Court at Calcutta. Calcutta Series Volume 16

List price: US$20.31

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902 edition. Excerpt: ...on. Sun' to recover money for goods sold and delivered. The plaintiffs who had not taken out a license for the sale of fermented liquors, under Bengal Act VII of 1878, sold to the defendant a. certain quantity of porter and beer, and sued him for the price thereof. The defendant contended that the contract was void imder s. 23 of the Contract Act, inasmuch as the plaintifis had sold the goods without obtaining a license under the Excise Act. The Chief Judge of the Small Cause Court held that the Excise Act of 1878 was an Act framed in the interest of the public, and that the contract under which the goods were sold by the plaintifis, who were unlicensed, was void under s. 23 of the Contract Act, and that, therefore, this suit to recover the price of the goods so sold would not lie; he therefore dismissed the suit, but at the request of the parties, referred the following question (amongst others) to the High Court, viz. 4. Is the agreement void having regard to the provisions of the Bengal Excise Act of 1878? Mr. Acwortk (with him Baboo Kali Natb Jllitter) for the plaintiffs.--The Bengal Excise Aot is purely a Revenue, Act and has no 'Small Cause Court Reference No. 7 of 1888 made by H. Millett, Esq., Chief Judge of the Court of Small Csuses, Calcutts, dated the 24th of July 1888. such efieot, as has been given to it, on the contract of sale. There is no section in the Act which forbids such a suit as the present. This case does not fall within Bezley v. Bignold (1); nor is the passage in p. 487 of Maxwell on Statutes referred to by the Judge applicable. Revenue Acts are treated as being for the protection of the revenue and not on grounds of public policy. I submit the contract was not illegal. See Maxwell on Statutes, p. 490, .show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 328 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 18mm | 585g
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236755049
  • 9781236755049