SEWDUTT ROY MASKARA Vs. NAHAPIET

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff claims Rs. 5,250 in respect of three contracts for the purchase and sale of jute. The defendant's case is that the plaintiff, while employed as a broker, really acted as a principal in the transactions, and therefore is debarred from recovering by Section 236 of the Indian. Contract Act.

(2.) The contracts were three in number: one, dated September 17 1906, contained in a memorandum in the form of a letter addressed by the plaintiff to the defendant in the following terms:-"Please note, we have this day bought for you (1,000) one thousand pucca bales of jute at Rs. 63-12 per bale, for delivery during October 1906, subject to the terms of the Barrabazar Marwari merchants letter contract. Please confirm and oblige."

(3.) This was acknowledged and the contract confirmed in a receipt bearing date September 17 1906. This document refers to two contracts, but it has not been disputed that one of the contracts referred to is the one for 1,000 bales (miscopied in the plaint as 500).