BEHARILAL BALDEOPRASAD FIRM OF MERCHANTS Vs. STATE
LAWS(MAD)-1953-11-9
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on November 03,1953

BEHARILAL BALDEOPRASAD FIRM OF MERCHANTS BY PARTNER Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ramaswami, J. - (1.) This is a revision petition which is sought to be filed against the decree and Judgment of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin in S. C. S. No. 504 of 1953.
(2.) The facts are: On 27-10-1949 the plaintiff, "a merchant at Tuticorin, placed a telegraphic order with the defendants' firm at Kanpur for one wagon of "dry peas dhall superior without broken or dankie". The first defendant accepted the order and contracted to supply the goods specified. On 7-11-1949 the plaintiff remitted a sum of Rs. 1000 through the Central Bank of India to the defendants as advance of the sale price of the contracted goods. On the goods arriving at Tuticorin the plaintiff inspected the goods and found them to be Inferior, broken and dankie mixed with husk. Thereupon the plaintiff called in Sri Subbier, P. W. 2, the defendants' Tuticorin representative, and he inspected the goods and satisfied himself that the complaint of the plaintiff was well founded. The plaintiff refused to accept the delivery of the goods and telegraphed his refusal and demanded return of the advance amount of Rs. 1000.
(3.) The reply of the defendants was two-fold, viz., that there was no breach of contract because the defendants wired to the plaintiff under Ex. A.5 that they had "purchased one wagon of pokhrayan dried peas dhall forty three twelve" and the plaintiff wired to the defendants under Ex. A.6 that the purchase of pokhrayan dhall was acceptable if dried without polish and broken and that the defendants have replied to the plaintiff under Ex. B.3 that they had purchased pokhrayan peas dhall dry without polish and of good quality end asked for confirmation and that the plaintiff confirmed the same under Ex. B.2 and that what reached Tuticorin railway station was that and secondly, that no part of the cause of action arose in Tuticorin and that the suit should have been filed in Kanpur.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.