JUGGILAL KAMLAPAT Vs. PRATABMULL RAMESHWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against a judgment of Ray, J. dated April 24, 1959. The facts in the case have been elaborately set out in the judgment of my learned brother Sen, J. and I need not repeat the same. I will only indicate the broad facts. Both the appellant and the respondent are habitual dealers in the sale and purchase of jute goods, which they do in a big way. By three contracts No. 2 12562 dated 22nd november 1952, No. 2 12619 dated 1st december, 1951 and No. 2/12655 dated 10th december, 1951 the respondent agreed to buy from the appellant diverse quantities of B. Twill, delivery in the months of April, May and June, 1952. In respect of the April delivery there were three settlement contracts as a result whereof the appellant became entitled to a sum of Rs. 50,175, which was duly paid by the respondent to the appellant and we are no longer concerned with the same. In respect of the may delivery, there were three settlement contracts as a result whereof the appellant became entitled to a sum of rs. 67,275/- from the respondent. This amount was not paid and was the subject-matter of the suit. This amount has been decreed in the court below and against it no objection is being preferred. The real objection involved in this appeal is in respect of the June delivery. The case of the appellant is that in respect of the June delivery, it tendered delivery orders to the respondent but the respondent failed and neglected to accept and for to pay for the same. It is stated that the appellant after due notice resold the goods by public auction and thereby suffered a loss of Rs. 91,109/7/- which it has claimed in the suit. By contract No. 2/13093 dated 19th April, 1952 the respondent agreed to buy from the appellant certain quantities of B. Twill deliverable in June, 1952. It is stated on behalf of the appellant that it tendered delivery orders in respect of the said goods but the respondent failed and neglected to accept and/or pay for the same whereupon the appellant after due notice resold the goods by public auction and suffered loss and damages amounting to Rs. 37,203/ -.

(2.) APART from these contracts for b. Twill, there were certain transactions in hessian. On 10th January, 1952 by contract No. 2112799 the responent agreed to buy from the appellant a certain quantity of hessian goods, delivery april, May and June 1952. It is stated that the appellant tendered delivery orders and the respondent paid for and took delivery of the April instalment, but failed and neglected to accept and|or pay for the May and June instalments, whereupon the appellant on due notice resold the same by public auction and suffered loss and damage amounting to Rs. 57,38114/ -.

(3.) IT is not disputed that all the contracts were in the standard forms of the Indian Jute Mills Association (hereinafter referred to as the I. J. M. A. contract form ).