High Courts(1908) 02 MAD CK 0004

Randupurayil Kunhisow, Karnavan and Manager of his Tarwad vs Neroth Kunhi Kannan and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 4 February 1908 · Citation: (1909) ILR (Mad) 1 : (1908) 18 MLJ 98

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 164 words
1.

We are of opinion that Section 7 of the Act of 1887, which is reproduced as Section 19 of the Act of 1900, precludes parties from contracting

themselves out of the Act by any contract made after anuary 1st, 1886, but that it does not affect the validity of contracts made prior to January

1st, 1886, whether the improvements were made before or after the coming into operation of the Act of 1887. As regerds Viru Mammad v.

Krishnan ILR (1893) M. 149 a refeence to the printed papers shows that the contacts of the defendants other than the 6th defendant were in fact

made after Janury 1st, 1886. We are unable to agree with the decision in Malikan v. Shankunni ILR (1898) M. 502.

2.

Our answer to the question which has been referred to us is that in the case of a contract made prior to January 1st, 1886, the rate of

compensation is governed by the terms of the contract.