KISHANLAL Vs. MANGILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is by the plaintiff against the concurring judgment of the Courts below dismissing his suit for recovery of damages for breach of contract.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case was that in the month of Bhadva, Samvat 2002, the defendants had entered into four contracts agreeing to sell in all 85 Manis of cotton at certain rates which were to be applied on Fagun Sudi 15, Samvat 2002. As the defendants failed to supply the cotton, the plaintiff assessed dameges on the basis of the difference between the market rate of cotton on that date and the agreed rate.

(3.) BOTH the Courts blow found hat there were four contracts between the parties as alleged by the plaintiff and they did not amount to wagering contracts; but as the necessary formalities required by the Circular had not been complied with, the contracts were held to be void and unenforceable.