9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (4) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was constituted, and has also a prayer in regard to costs, aS it was, the plaintiff claimed ₹ 45,000/- but actually got a decree for ₹ 22,614/-. The Court ordered costs and pleader's fee for each party in proportion to its success; as each won about half, the costs nearly, but not quite, cancelled mutually. The plaintiff-appellant cannot therefore make any grievance on this ground. 2. There is no prayer by the plaintiff in respect of the disallowed portion of his claim, nor is there any cross appeal or cross objection by the defendant-respondent in regard to the portion of the claim that has been actually allowed. This is now impossible for him to challenge the merits of the trial Court's decision. The controversy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he work was ordered verbally in July and August 1944. The defendant No. 1 had ordered it and at the relevant places he has been described as the promoter elsewhere he has been described as ''the promoter and Managing Director but at the time of his entering into this contract, the finding is that he was the promoter; in fact, at that time there was no company or so no Managing Director of that company. 6. The judgment of the trial court is obscure at certain places but this much clearly emerges from the relevant portions of the judgment, specially paragraph No. 28, in which the defendant's version of the contract has been disbelieved. 7. It is clear that as the Managing Director of the company the defendant No. 1 is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 948, enables them to create an incorporated company. It involves the idea of exertion for the purpose of getting up and starting a company, or what is called 'floating' it, and also the idea of some duty towards the company imposed by, or arising from, the position which the so-called promoter assumes towards it. The question whether a person is Or is not a promoter is a question o fact depending upon what the so-called promoter really did, and a judge in summing up to a jury is not bound to define the term. A person who as principal procures or aids in procuring the incorporation of a company is generally a promoter thereof, and he does not escape from liability by acting through agents But persons who act professionally onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich he has no nexus and can have no nexus, until with his consent it takes over the promoter's liability. The defendant respondent No. 1 seems to have been very sure of his personal immunity and has not filed any appeal or cross-objection, This is unfortunate because the trial Court's judgment does appear difficult and obscure at places, and the defendant could possibly have tried to reverse the findings on fact; but that became impossible now. 10. The result is that on the finding the defendant No. 1 ordered the building work as the promoter and the amount decreed is still payable to the plaintiff on that account, as I hold that the promoter is personally liable. In these circumstances the appeal is to be allowed and the decree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
