S.P. TRADERS Vs. HOOGHLY MILLS CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of price of goods sold and delivered.

(2.) The plaintiff is a trader in jute. The plaintiff claims to have sold 4165 quintals (approximate) jute of different specifications and grades during August and September, 1997. The defendant had received the goods but did not pay the price. In spite of repeated demands, the plaintiff has failed and/or neglected to pay the aforesaid sum or any portion thereof. The plaintiff from time to time issued notices of demand.

(3.) The defendant duly contested the said suit by filing a written statement. The defendant, amongst others, has urged that the plaintiff is not the owner of the goods and there is no privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant. Accordingly, the plaintiff is not entitled to claim for the price of the goods alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. The suit is also not maintainable in absence of Ashoke Kumar Tatar who, according to the defendant, is the real owner of the goods and the plaintiff is a financier who used to give loan and provide finance to Ashoke Kumar Tatar to buy goods.