R S A KASI IYER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the dismissal of their suit for money as also the decreeing of a counter claim made by the defendant against them.

(2.) The facts may be briefly stated. Plaintiffs are a firm of yarn merchants doing business in Trivandrum. They are agents of the Harvey Mills at Madura. The Defence of Travancore Rules had fixed a ceiling price for yarn by notification dated 28.7.1941, which was published in the Gazette dated 29.7.1941, Part I at page 1533. The price fixed for 20s. yarn was Rs. 6-6-0 per bundle. The plaintiffs had entered into forward contracts with the Madura Mills for delivery of 150 bales of yarn per month from July 1941 to March 1942 at rates varying from Rs. 5-12-0 to Rs. 6-2-0 per bundle, one bale being made up of 40 bundles. When matters stood thus on 13.8.1941 there was a conference at the Madura Mills which was attended by the representatives of the Madura Mills, Mr. Doak, the representative of the plaintiffs as also the representative of the respondent, the State of Travancore, Dr. Parameswaran otherwise known as Warren. At that conference the desirability and necessity of fixing a higher ceiling price for 20s. yarn was discussed and it was decided that the ceiling price be fixed at Rs. 7-10-0 per bundle. There was a discussion as to the price at which the yarn as per the aforesaid forward bookings should be sold. There was a controversy at to whether that price was fixed on the agreement of parties or not. A few days after the conference that is, on 25.8.1941, the State issued Ext. A to the plaintiffs. Ext. A reads as follows:-

(3.) Accordingly sales were made by the plaintiffs to the State and the suit was for Rs. 56,795 and interest thereon by way of the price of yarn supplied. The price was claimed at Rs. 7-12-0 per bundle. The suit was preceded by a notice under S.65 of the Travancore Code of Civil Procedure corresponding to S.80 of the Indian Code. Ext. AD dated 26.7.1944 is the notice. It was not replied to. The suit was filed on 12.6.1120. The defence inter alia was that the plaintiffs owed the State Rs. 72,539-8-0 by way of the difference between the price at which the bales represented by the forward bookings were acquired under Ext. A and the price at which the quantity of yarn was sold to consumers by the plaintiffs. The price of acquisition which was first fixed at the price as per the bookings was afterwards raised to Rs. 6-6-0 which was the ceiling price that prevailed at the time of the acquisition. The rate of Rs. 7-12-0 per bundle claimed by the plaintiffs for the supply made to the State was also questioned as according to the State the plaintiffs were entitled to get only Rs. 7-8-0 per bundle. This last controversy was decided by the court below in favour of the plaintiffs and that conclusion not having been challenged has become final. The controversy that there was in respect of the number of bales as per the forward bookings dealt with by the plaintiffs was also decided against the State and that finding has also become final for want of a challenge.