MALIRAM CHOWDHURY Vs. JAGANNATH MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff who sued for recovery of Rs. 7690. 72 paise as un paid price of goods supplied on credit to the defendant is the appellant against the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge. Sambalpur who has dismissed his claim.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY the plaintiff runs a wholesale and retail business in cloth. The main place of business is at Calcutta but there is a branch at Sambalpur. The defendant is a dealer in cloth and had certain purchases made from the plaintiff on four different dates in the month of April, 1964. The total price of the goods taken on these four dates came to Rupees 7453. 21 paise. The plaintiff claimed that these transactions were on credit and the memos on the respective dates were signed by the defendant in token of receipt of the goods and it was stipulated that the defendant would pay up the money. The defendant omitted to pay the amount. Hence the suit.

(3.) THE defendant contended that the plaintiff Maliram Chowdhury was not the proprietor of the firm Maliram-Gourishankar. But Maliram Gourishankar was a firm consisting of Maliram. (P. W. 2) and Gourishankar (P. W. 1 ). Since the firm was not registered under the Partnership Act the suit was hit under Section 69 thereof. He next contended that while the transactions did take place on the dates indicated and to the extents specified, they were all on cash basis and thus the defendant owed no money to the plaintiff.