MALWA VATIASPATI AND CHEMICAL CO. Vs. BHERULAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the concurrent judgments against the defendant appellant for compensation for non -delivery according to contract of certain goods ordered from him by the plaintiff; the prices bad gone up and compensation was awarded on the basis of the difference. The defendant's justification was that the plaintiff had failed to comply with one of the terms of the contract for the deposit of 25% of the price as advance. The plaintiff's rejoinder was that his condition printed on the order -form applied only to orders that were to be served through the railway, and not for orders served at Indore itself. This contention being accepted by both the Courts, the suit was allowed.

(2.) THE only question is, whether the condition numbered (sic) on the order -form of the defendant is one applicable to each and every order or applies only to orders through the banks, one of interpretation of a document or contract. That way it can be agitated in second appeal; however, I find it can be answered without noticing the respondent.

(3.) THE relevant condition is No. 11, which runs thus: 25% value of the goods ordered is to be paid in advance and for the balance the R/R will be sent through Bank. The advance should be remitted direct to the Company by draft payable to the Company at Indore.