9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (6) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ff is a chitty foreman. The 1st defendant had taken one C class ticket in the chitty run by the plaintiff and he prized the chitty at the 11th instalment and drew the chitty amount after executing a chitty kychit on 7-10-1970. The 2nd defendant had joined in that bond as surety for the 1st defendant. Under the terms of the said chitty bond the defendants had undertaken to pay the full amount of future subscriptions in lump in case of default being committed in payment of any of the instalments. The 1st defendant defaulted payment of the 20th instalment which fell due on 10-6-1971 and no amounts were remitted by him towards the chitty thereafter. The term of the chitty came to a close on 10-5-1973. It was only thereafter that the foreman (pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the plaintiff entitling him to recover the amount of Rs. 315/- representing all the defaulted instalments with interest and costs. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 have come up with this revision petition challenging the legality and correctness of the said decision rendered by the court below. 2. Counsel for the petitioners contended before us that since the suit is based on the chitty security bond which while providing for payment in instalments contains also a stipulation that if default be made in payment of one or more instalments the entire balance amount shall be payable in lump, it is Article 37 of the Act that applies to the case and the starting point for limitation is the date when default was committed by the defendants in payin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1120 was in the following terms:-- A foreman shall not be entitled to claim consolidated payment of all the future subscriptions from a defaulting prized subscriber unless he shall have demanded the same in writing. This provision which is mandatory in character will apply to all chitty transactions entered into in the area wherein the Act was applicable irrespective of the stipulations that may be contained in the security bond executed between the parties and it has got to be read into every contract or chitty security bond as forming an integral part thereof. Such being the position, it is not possible to bring cases like the present one governed by Sub-section (1) of Section 32 within the scope of Article 37 of the Act whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of service of that notice. Hence the learned Judge pointed out that even if it is Article 113 and not Article 37 that applied to the case the suit was barred. However, there are some observations in the judgment of the learned Judge to the effect that even in respect of a chitty transaction governed by the provisions of the Travancore Chitties Act the period of limitation for a suit instituted by the foreman to recover from a prized subscriber the amount of defaulted instalments due under a chitty security bond would be governed by Article 37. In the light of the conclusion already expressed by us on this aspect those observations cannot be regarded as embodying the correct legal position. 6. Counsel for the revision petitioners is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
