https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186937 Delivery of goods to a carrier for transmission to the buyer was treated as delivery to the buyer for territorial jurisdiction, so the Dhanbad Court had jurisdiction because the cause of action arose within that area. The plaintiff's suit was not defeated by misjoinder or non-joinder, as the defendant's internal arrangement with another person did not extinguish the defendant's continuing personal liability. Regular account books, counterfoil bills and oral evidence were accepted as proof of the dues. An acknowledgement of liability in correspondence, supported by later payments, kept the claim within time and avoided any Partnership Act or limitation bar. Interest was also allowed as a reasonable incident of delayed payment. en-us Thu, 14 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 May 2020 10:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186937 Delivery of goods to a carrier for transmission to the buyer was treated as delivery to the buyer for territorial jurisdiction, so the Dhanbad Court had jurisdiction because the cause of action arose within that area. The plaintiff's suit was not defeated by misjoinder or non-joinder, as the defendant's internal arrangement with another person did not extinguish the defendant's continuing personal liability. Regular account books, counterfoil bills and oral evidence were accepted as proof of the dues. An acknowledgement of liability in correspondence, supported by later payments, kept the claim within time and avoided any Partnership Act or limitation bar. Interest was also allowed as a reasonable incident of delayed payment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186937