GIRDHARMAL KAPUR CHAND Vs. DEV RAJ MADAN GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent a partnership firm carrying on business as commission agents in the town of Khanna in Punjab brought the suit out of which this appeal has arisen against the appellant firm for recovery of Rs. 17,615/10/- claimed to be due to it on account of the purchases and sales made on behalf of the appellant firm. Between December 1946 and February 3, 1947, 7600 bags of cotton seeds were, according to the plaint purchased by the respondent on behalf of the appellant firm at various rates, out of which 5300 bags are said to have been sold by it on behalf of the appellant firm between the dates of January 2, 1947 and February 3, 1947. Thus on February, 3, 1947 2300 bags of cotton-seeds we left on its hands. In may, 1947 the market for cotton-seeds was falling and so the respondent firm asked the appellant either to remove the goods within 48 hours on payment of the full price or pay something more by way of margin and informed them that otherwise the goods would be sold. As no reply was received these 2300 bags were sold on May 24 - Some at the rate of Rs.11/11/6 per maund and the rest at the rate of Rs. 11/12/per maund. Apart from these transaction in cotton-seeds the respondent firm, according to the plaint, also purchased 100 bales of cotton of which 50 bales were also sold on behalf of the appellant firm, so that after February 14, 1947 50 bales of cotton purchased by the appellant firm were lying with the respondent. These 50 bales were also sold by the respondent on May 24, 1947 at the rate of Rs. 27/12/- per maund, as the appellant took no action when the respondent asked them either to take away these bales on payment of the price or to put in more money by way of margin. On the accounts, it was said, Rs. 15,556/10/- remained due to the plaintiff firm from the defendant firm. The suit was brought for the recovery of this amount together with interest.

(2.) In contesting the suit the appellant while admitting trade relations with the plaintiff firm disputed the correctness of the accounts. The plaintiff's case about the purchase of cotton-seeds and cotton bales and the fact that 2300 bags of cotton seeds and 50 bales of cotton purchased by it remained with the plaintiff firm was denied. It was urged that the transactions were wagering contracts, and so void in law, that they being forward transactions were prohibited by law and further that the plaintiff firm was not a registered firm under the Indian Partnership Act, and therefore the suit did not lie.

(3.) The Trial Court rejected all the contentions in law and accepted the plaintiff's story as regards the transactions but held as regards the accounting, on a consideration of the evidence, that the plaintiffs were bound to give credit to the defendants for the sale of 2300 bags of cotton-seeds at the contract rate of Rs. 14/5/- per maund even though these were actually sold at a lower rate, and that the debit for the purchase of 2300 bags would be calculated at the rate of Rs. 13/8/- and Rs. 13/10/- per maund the rates at which they were actually purchased even though they were agreed to be purchased at the rate of Rs. 14/5//- per maund on February 3, 1947. The price of 2300 bags of cotton seeds and 50 bales of cotton on the final sale was directed to be credited in favour of the defendant at the market rate on May, 28,1947. Other directions as regards calculations of incidental charges and interest were also given. The court appointed an Advocate as Commissioner for the purpose of calculating the amount due after as certaining the market price. After consideration of the report submitted by the Commissioner, the learned Judge passed a final decree in favour of the plaintiff for Rs. 9749/3/9 proportionate costs.