[1] The appellant contends that the doctrine of relief against the enforcement of a penal clause is inapplicable in the case of contracts other than those between landlord and tenant. This is negatived by the authority of Bheema Venkatramana v. Bommini Gurappa 28 Ind. Cas. 970 [LQ/MadHC/1915/118] : 2 L.W. 537 : M.L.J. 488.
Next it is urged that the District Judge s use of his discretion to grant relief was unjustifiable. We do not agree. Time was not, in our opinion, of the essence of the contract; and the person substantially in fault was in fact the appellant.
3. The appeal against appellate order fails and is dismissed with costs.
Are you looking for a
legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a
legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and
Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.
Ramayanam Jogamma v. Enamandra Ramalakshmi
Ramayanam Jogamma v. Enamandra Ramalakshmi
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
Appeal Against Order No. 66 Of 1914 | 16-07-1915
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OLDFIELD
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SADASIVA AYYAR
Eq Citations
- 30 IND. CAS. 248
- AIR 1916 MAD 774 1
- LQ/MadHC/1915/261
Head Note
Contract and Specific Relief — Specific Relief Act, 1963 — S. 34 — Penal clause — Doctrine of relief against enforcement of — Applicability to contracts other than those between landlord and tenant — Held, doctrine of relief against enforcement of a penal clause is applicable to all contracts — Penal clause — Relief against enforcement of — Held, not available to a person who is substantially in fault — Limitation Act, 1963, S. 56
