(1.) This is an appeal from a judgment of a--- Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta in West Bengal, reversing the decision of a Single Judge of that Court, who had refused to set aside an award given by the arbitration tribunal of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce on a submission made by the respondents. The facts of the case are as follows.
(2.) On 25-1-1916, the appellants entered into a contract with the respondents for the sale of 5,000 maunds of jute, which was evidenced by a "sold note" (Ex. A), which is in the form of a letter addressed to the respondents, commencing with these words : "We have this day sold by your order and for your account to the undersigned, etc." The word "undersigned" admittedly refers to the appellants, and, at the end of the contract below their signature, the word "brokers" is written. On the same day, a "bought note" (Ex. B) was addressed by the appellants to the Bengal Jute Mill Company, with the following statement : "We have this day bought by your order and for your account from the undersigned, etc."' In this note also, the word "undersigned" refers to the appellants, and, underneath their signature, the word "brokers" appears, as in the "sold note". There are various provisions in the sold note, relating to delivery of jute, non-delivery of documents, non-acceptance of documents, claims, etc., but the most material provisions are to be found in Paras. 10 and it. Paragraph 10 provides that the sellers may in certain cases be granted an extension of time for delivering the jute for a period not exceeding thirty days from the due date free of all penalties, and if the contract is not implemented within the extended period, the buyers would be entitled to several options, one of them being to cancel the contract and charge the sellers the difference between the contract rate and the market rate on the day on which the opinion is declared. In the same para, there is another provision to the following effect :
(3.) The 11th para provides among other things that :