MOTILAL CHANNOOLAL VAISH Vs. GOLDEN TOBACCO CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs appeal from the decree dismissing his suit for money.

(2.) THE plaintiff was admittedly acting as distributor of the cigarettes manufactured by the defendant-company. He worked as such during the period 1-2-1946 to 3112-1946. At the end of this period, goods worth Rs. 1723/12/- were with him. He asked the defendant company to take back the goods and pay him the price. He also claimed Rs. 96/-/6 as an outstanding due. The claim for Rs. 96/-/6 was negatived by the trial Court and was not pressed before me. The claim for Rs. 1723-12-0 was dismissed by the Courts below on the ground that the property in the goods had passed to the plaintiff by sale and accordingly he was not entitled to refund of the price.

(3.) ON 1-2-1946, the plaintiff deposited Rs. 500/-with the defendant-company as security and began placing orders for the supply of cigarettes. It is not disputed that the goods used to be supplied to the plaintiff on payment of the price after deducting a certain percentage on account of commission. The defendant-company had also agreed to pay octroi duty either wholly or in part according to the quality of the cigarettes. Salesmen were appointed by the plaintiff, whose salaries were paid by the defendant-company. On one occasion, the defendant company had also taken back soiled goods from the plaintiff. and the persons who had made purchases from him. Plaintiff was also required to submit a statement of the stock of certain qualities of cigarettes periodically to the defendant-company. The charges of handbills and cinema slides paid by the plaintiff for advertisement used to be recouped by the defendant-company. It was urged that on these facts, the Courts below should have held that the goods belonged to the defendant-company and the plaintiff was entitled to recover the price.