LOUIS DREYFUS AND CO. LTD. BY ITS THEN MANAGER RICHARD HOWARD POLLARD AND THE PRESENT MANAGER JOHN GREENWOOD AND ORS. Vs. THE SOUTH ARCOT GROUNDNUT MARKET COMMITTEE BY ITS PRESIDENT, A. LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals arise out of three suits that were tried together in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore because they gave rise to identical questions of fact and law. In each suit, the plaintiff was a company purchasing groundnuts and exporting them from Cuddalore in the South Arcot district. The common defendant in the three suits was "The South Arcot Groundnut Market Committee" by its President. That Committee was established under Section 5 of the Madras Commercial Crops Act of 1933; and in exercise of the powers conferred upon it by the Act, it claimed fees on sales of groundnuts to the three plaintiff firms. The plaintiffs paid what was demanded of them and filed these three suits for the return of the sums paid by them.

(2.) TWO questions have been argued in these appeals : one is whether the sales and purchases in question were within the South Arcot district, and the other is whether the defendant committee had power to levy these fees, in view of the feet that the plaintiffs sold the property, they say, outside the district The learned Subordinate Judge decided these and other questions against the plaintiffs, who have appealed to this Court.

(3.) EX . P -4 is the contract discussed by the learned advocate for Louis Dreyfus & Co,. It has 18 clauses. In general, the procedure to be adopted was that the seller, who was apparently a resident of Sendurai situated outside the South Arcot district, was to send the nuts by rail to Cuddalore. The contract contains specifications of the bags in which the nuts are to be packed. The buyers agreed to pay advances up to 90 per cent of the value of all goods sent upon obtaining the railway receipt. The bags were to be taken to the godowris of the buyers, who inspected the goods and reserved the right, if not satisfied with the weight, quality and conditions of the goods, to reject them. If they accepted the goods, then they paid1 the sellers whatever was due to them after deducting the advances. If they rejected the goods, they demanded whatever had been paid by way of advances. This general description of the nature of the contract makes it clear that the final contract of sale was completed only in Cuddalore, after an inspection had been made. There are many passages in the contract which make this very clear. Clause 3, for example, says :