{"id":141849,"date":"1961-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1961-01-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961"},"modified":"2016-05-24T05:10:07","modified_gmt":"2016-05-23T23:40:07","slug":"international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","title":{"rendered":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR   77, \t\t  1962 SCR  (2) 579<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K L.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Kapur, J.L.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nINTERNATIONAL CONTRACTORS LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nPRASANTA KUMAR SUR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n25\/01\/1961\n\nBENCH:\nKAPUR, J.L.\nBENCH:\nKAPUR, J.L.\nSHAH, J.C.\n\nCITATION:\n 1962 AIR   77\t\t  1962 SCR  (2) 579\n CITATOR INFO :\n E&amp;D\t    1989 SC 606\t (4)\n\n\nACT:\nSale-Repudiation  of  contract by vendor-Suit  for  specific\nperformance,  if  lies\twithout formal\ttender\tof  Purchase\nmoney.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellant\tpurchased the property in dispute  from\t the\nrespondent  but soon thereafter there was an  agreement\t for\nreconveyance  of  the property to the  respondent  within  a\nperiod\tof two years for almost the same value for which  it\nwas  'sold.   The relevant clause of this agreement  was  as\nfollows:-\n\" Clause 3-The purchase shall be completed by the purchasers\nwithin two years, i.e., to say on or before the 10th day  of\nFebruary, 1943, time being the essence of the contract.\t  If\nthe purchasers shall on or before the 10th day of  February,\n1943, pay to the vendor a sum of Rs. 10,001 the vendor shall\nat the cost of the purchasers execute such conveyance as may\nbe necessary  for conveying and\t transferring  its  right,\ntitle\tand  interest  in  the\tsaid  property\t free\tfrom\nencumbrances, if any, created by it.\"\nBefore\tthe expiry of the stipulated period  the  respondent\nentered\t into correspondence with the appellant\t asking\t for\nthe  completion\t of the agreed reconveyance  and  intimating\nthat the purchase money was ready to be paid, but after some\ncorrespondence the appellant's solicitors totally repudiated\nthe agreement for reconveyance.\t The respondent did not then\ntender\tthe  price agreed to be paid and filed\ta  suit\t for\nspecific performance which was dismissed by the trial  court\non  the ground that the respondent had not paid\t the  money.\nThe High Court decreed the suit.\nHeld, that as the appellant had totally repudiated the\tcon-\ntract for reconveyance and had failed to perform his part of\nthe  contract it was open to the respondent to sue  for\t its\nenforcement and the High Court was right in holding that the\nrespondent   was   entitled  to\t a   decree   for   specific\nperformance.\nIn a case of total repudiation of the agreement for sale  it\nwas useless to make a formal tender of the purchase money.\nHunter\tv.  Daniel  (1845)  4 Hare  420,  and  Chalikani  v.\nZamindar  of  Tuni  and\t Others\t (1922)\t L.R.  50  I.A.\t 41.\nfollowed.\nIsmail\tBhai Rahim v. Adam Osman I.L.R. [1938] 2  Cal.\t337,\ndistinguished.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 205 of 1956.<br \/>\nAppeal\tfrom the judgment and decree dated May 26, 1954,  of<br \/>\nthe  Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Original Decree\t No.<br \/>\n127 of 1950.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">580<\/span><\/p>\n<p>D.   N. Mukherjee, for the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>N.   C. Chatterjee and R. B. Biswas, for respondents<br \/>\nNos. 1(a) and 2.\n<\/p>\n<p>1961.  January 25.  The Judgment of the Court was  delivered<br \/>\nby<br \/>\nKAPUR, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment and  decree<br \/>\nof the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta.  The  appellant<br \/>\nwas  the defendant in the suit out of which this appeal\t has<br \/>\narisen\tand  respondent\t No. 1 was the\tplaintiff,  and\t the<br \/>\nsecond\trespondent was a proforma defendant.  The  facts  of<br \/>\nthis case are these:\n<\/p>\n<p>On  February  4, 1941, the respondent sold the\tproperty  in<br \/>\ndispute\t to  the  appellant for a sum  of  Rs.\t10,000.\t  On<br \/>\nFebruary  10, 1941, there was an agreement for\treconveyance<br \/>\nwithin\ta period up to February 10, 1943, for a sum  of\t Rs.<br \/>\n10,001.\t The relevant clause of this agreement was the third<br \/>\nclause which was as follows : &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221; Clause 3.-The purchase shall be completed by<br \/>\n\t      the purchasers within two years, i.e., to\t say<br \/>\n\t      on or<br \/>\n\t      before  the 10th day of February,\t 1943,\ttime<br \/>\n\t      being  the  essence of the contract.   If\t the<br \/>\n\t      purchasers shall on or before the 10th day  of<br \/>\n\t      February, 1943, pay to the vendor a sum of Rs.<br \/>\n\t      10,001  the  vendor shall at the cost  of\t the<br \/>\n\t      purchasers  execute such conveyance as may  be<br \/>\n\t      necessary\t for conveying and transferring\t its<br \/>\n\t      right, title and interest in the said property<br \/>\n\t      free from encumbrances, if any, created by it.<br \/>\n\t      &#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>On  November  26, 1942, the solicitor for respondent  No.  1<br \/>\nwrote a letter to the appellant stating that that respondent<br \/>\nwas  ready  and willing to have the  purchase  completed  as<br \/>\nearly as possible on payment of Rs. 10,001.  Along with that<br \/>\nletter a draft conveyance was sent for approval but all this<br \/>\nwas   subject  to  the\tresult\tof  a  search  as   to\t the<br \/>\nencumbrances, if any, created by the appellant.\t On November<br \/>\n30,  1942,  the solicitors for the appellant  company  wrote<br \/>\nback  saying that immediate arrangements should be made\t for<br \/>\ngiving\tinspection  of the agreement of sale  on  which\t the<br \/>\nrespondents  were  relying as the appellant  was  unable  to<br \/>\ntrace the copy of the said agreement from its record.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">581<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Again on December 11, 1942, the respondent&#8217;s solicitor<br \/>\nsent a letter stating :\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221;\t My  client is very eager  to  complete\t the<br \/>\n\t      purchase\tand  the  full\tconsideration  money<br \/>\n\t      therefore is lying idle in his hands awaiting,<br \/>\n\t      the return of the relative draft conveyance as<br \/>\n\t      approved by you on your clients&#8217; behalf.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>To this the reply of the appellant&#8217;s solicitors dated<br \/>\nDecember 18, 1942, was:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221;\t  Our  clients\tdeny  that  there  was\t any<br \/>\n\t      concluded\t or  valid agreement for  sale\twith<br \/>\n\t      your  client  or\twith  any  other  person  in<br \/>\n\t      respect of the above premises.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>On June 10, 1943, respondent No. 1 filed a suit for specific<br \/>\nperformance  and  in the alternative for redemption  on\t the<br \/>\nfooting that the transaction was in reality a mortgage.\t The<br \/>\ntrial  court  dismissed the suit oil May 16,  1950,  holding<br \/>\nthat  the  transaction on the basis of which  the  suit\t was<br \/>\nbrought was not a mortgage but was out and out sale with  an<br \/>\nagreement for repurchase and as the vendor had not paid\t the<br \/>\nmoney  &#8221; punctually according to the terms of the  contract,<br \/>\nthe   right  to\t repurchase  was  lost\tand  could  not\t  be<br \/>\nspecifically  enforced\t&#8220;, and the court had  no  power\t &#8216;to<br \/>\nafford\tany relief against forfeiture of this  breach.\t The<br \/>\nplaintiff-respondent took an appeal to the High Court and it<br \/>\nwas  there  held  that\tthe  failure  on  the  part  of\t the<br \/>\nrespondents   to   actually  tender  the   amount   of\t the<br \/>\nconsideration does riot bar a suit for specific\t performance<br \/>\nbecause\t after\tthe  repudiation  of  the  contract  by\t the<br \/>\nappellant,  the tender would have been a useless  formality.<br \/>\nThe  appeal was therefore allowed and the suit for  specific<br \/>\nperformance decreed.  It is against this judgment and decree<br \/>\nthat the appellant has come in appeal to this Court.<br \/>\nThe correspondence which has been proved in this case  shows<br \/>\nthat  when  the\t respondent&#8217;s  solicitor  called  upon\t the<br \/>\nappellant  to  reconvey\t the  property\tin  dispute  to\t the<br \/>\nrespondent  and also sent a draft conveyance, the  appellant<br \/>\ndenied\tthat there was any concluded or valid agreement\t for<br \/>\nsale  in  respect of the property in dispute.\tThis  was  a<br \/>\ncomplete repudiation of the contract to reconvey which the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">582<\/span><br \/>\nappellant had agreed to by cl. 3 of the agreement which\t has<br \/>\nbeen  set  out above.  As the appellant had  repudiated\t the<br \/>\ncontract  and had thus failed to carry out his part  of\t the<br \/>\ncontract  it  was  open to the respondent  to  sue  for\t its<br \/>\nenforcement.   But it was argued on behalf of the  appellant<br \/>\nthat  the  respondent did not tender the  price,  i.e.,\t Rs.<br \/>\n10,001 nor was he in a position to do so and in that view of<br \/>\nthe  matter the respondent is not entitled to get  a  decree<br \/>\nfor specific performance.  In cases of this kind no question<br \/>\nof  formal  tender of the amount to be paid arises  and\t the<br \/>\nquestion  to be decided is not whether any money was  within<br \/>\nthe  power  of\tthe respondent\tbut  whether  the  appellant<br \/>\ndefinitely and unequivocally, refused to carry out his\tpart<br \/>\nof the contract and intimated that money will be refused  if<br \/>\ntendered.   The principle laid down in Hunter v. Daniel\t (1)<br \/>\nis  applicable to cases of this kind.  In that case  Wigram,<br \/>\nV. C., stated the position as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221; The practice of the Courts is not to require<br \/>\n\t      a party to make a formal tender where from the<br \/>\n\t      facts stated in the Bill or from the  evidence<br \/>\n\t      it  appears the tender would have been a\tmere<br \/>\n\t      form  and that the party to whom it  was\tmade<br \/>\n\t      would have refused to accept the money.  &#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Lord  Buckmaster in Chalikani Venkatarayanim v. Zamindar  of<br \/>\nTuni (2) accepted this statement of the law and observed:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221;\t Their Lordships think that that is  a\ttrue<br \/>\n\t      and  accurate expression of the law,  and\t the<br \/>\n\t      question therefore is whether the answer\tthat<br \/>\n\t      was  sent on behalf of the mortgagee  amounted<br \/>\n\t      to a clear refusal to accept the money.  &#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This principle applies to the facts of the present case also<br \/>\nand the question is whether the answer sent on behalf of the<br \/>\nappellant  amounted to an unequivocal refusal to  carry\t out<br \/>\nits part of the contract which in our opinion it was.<br \/>\nIt was next contended that the offer made by a solicitor  is<br \/>\nnot a proper offer in law and therefore when<br \/>\n(1) (1845) 4 Hare 420; 67 E.R. 712.  (2) (1922)\t 50 I.A. 41,\n<\/p>\n<p>47.<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">583<\/span><br \/>\nthe  solicitor for the respondent called upon the  appellant<br \/>\nto  execute the documents they were not bound to do so.\t  We<br \/>\nare  unable to accord our assent to this  proposition.\t The<br \/>\ncase upon which the Counsel for the appellant relied,  i.e.,<br \/>\nIsmail\tBhai Rahim v. Adam Osman (1), in our opinion has  no<br \/>\napplication to the facts and circumstances of this case.  It<br \/>\nwas  held  in that case that the offer made  by\t a  promiser<br \/>\nthrough\t a solicitor to pay a debt with interest thereon  at<br \/>\nthe date of the offer does not of itself afford a reasonable<br \/>\nopportunity  to\t the  promisee\tof  ascertaining  that\t the<br \/>\npromisor is able and willing to perform his promise.  Unless<br \/>\nthere  is  something peculiar in the circumstances  of\tthat<br \/>\ncase that case does not lay down good law.  It is  difficult<br \/>\nto see why a tender made through a solicitor who is for that<br \/>\npurpose an agent, is not a proper tender.\n<\/p>\n<p>In  our\t opinion  the  High  Court  rightly  held  that\t the<br \/>\nrespondents  were  entitled to a decree\t for  specific\tper-<br \/>\nformance and we therefore dismiss this appeal with costs.<br \/>\nAppeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 77, 1962 SCR (2) 579 Author: K L. Bench: Kapur, J.L. PETITIONER: INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTORS LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: PRASANTA KUMAR SUR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/01\/1961 BENCH: KAPUR, J.L. BENCH: KAPUR, J.L. SHAH, J.C. CITATION: 1962 AIR 77 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-141849","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961\",\"datePublished\":\"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\"},\"wordCount\":1290,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\",\"name\":\"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961","datePublished":"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961"},"wordCount":1290,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961","name":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1961-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-23T23:40:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/international-contractors-ltd-vs-prasanta-kumar-sur-on-25-january-1961#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"International Contractors Ltd vs Prasanta Kumar Sur on 25 January, 1961"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141849","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=141849"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141849\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141849"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141849"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141849"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}