DINSHAW IRON WORKS Vs. MIAKHAN ADAMJI AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against a decision of the Full Court of the Bombay Small Cause Court.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the application are these. Down to December, 1937, the defendant-firm, which is called Dinshaw Iron Works, was carried on by two ladies who are the present applicants. On December 1, 1937, they transferred the business to another firm which continued to carry on the business under the former name of Dinshaw Iron Works. THE plaintiffs had supplied goods to Dinshaw Iron Works before the transfer of the business from the present applicants, and they continued to supply goods to the firm thereafter. In the present suit they sue the applicants for the price of goods supplied in March and April, 1940, that is to say, more than two years after the business had been transferred, and their case is that they had no notice of the transfer of the business, and that they are, therefore, entitled to look to the applicants for the discharge of their account, although, in fact, the goods were supplied to the firm after the applicants had ceased to have any connection with it.

(3.) HOWEVER, the first point, which is taken in this revision application, is that the Full Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Section 37 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act provides:- Save as otherwise provided by this Chapter... every decree and order of the Small Cause Court in a suit shall be final and conclusive.