(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal from the dismissal of his claim for the recovery of Rs. 1367-8-0 alleged to be due to him from the respondent.
(2.) IT is common ground that the appellant is a fruit seller carrying on business at Narkhed. The respondent carries on business of a broker in Madras. The appellant sent 485 baskets of oranges to Madras sometime in the year 1949 for being sold through the respondent. The latter submitted an account to the appellant on 22-3-1949 showing that the oranges had been disposed of for a sum of Rs. 1585/-, and that after deducting the usual charges, a sum of Rs. 1417-8-6 was found due to the appellant. A draft dated 31-3-1949 drawn by the Ex change Bank of India and Africa, Madras Branch, on its Branch at Nagpur for the aforesaid amount was sent by the respondent to the appellant. The appellant tried to cash the draft, three weeks or so after he received the draft, the Bank having gone in liquidation in the meanwhile, he could not cash it. He therefore proceeded to Madras and handed over the draft to the respondent. According to the appellant, the respondent accepted that draft, paid a sum of Rs. 50/- and promised to send him the balance shortly thereafter. While the respondent admits that the appellant handed over the draft to him, he says that his only object in taking the draft was to see what could be realised from the Bank and send to the appellant whatever was realised by him from the Bank. He also says that he gave Rs. 50/-to the appellant when he visited Madras, because the appellant said that he was short of funds and had no money even to pay his railway fare for the return journey.
(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit. The lower appellate Court dismissed it on the ground that the appellant was guilty of delay in the presentation of the draft, that this delay on his part caused injury to the respondent and that therefore the latter was protected by Sec. 84 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Upon this ground it dismissed the suit.