Bishan Narain, J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the defendant firm against a decree of the trial Court for payment of Rs. 5,513/8/-to the plaintiff firm as darrfages for breach of contract, and it will be convenient to give the facts of this case in Chronological order before dealing with the various points raised in this appeal.
(2.) The plaintiff firm carries on the business of manufacture and sale of laces and ribbons etc., under the name of Aspirants Mills, Majitha Road, Amritsar. The defendant firm also carries on the business of purchase and sale of laces etc. at Amritsar. On 25-5-1948 the defendant firm purchased 1,000 dozen of laces known as "Tara" laces at Rs. 17/8/- per dozen and 100 dozen laces known as "Fancy" laces at Rs. 28/- per dozen. The purchasers paid Rs. 300/- as advance and it was agreed between the parties that it was open to the plaintiff firm to manufacture the goods and to supply the same as and when ready, but the entire quantity had to be supplied within three months, that is, till 25-8-1948. The plaintiff firm supplied certain quantities on the date of the contract and some more quantities on 29-5-1948 and 5-6-1948 and the defendant firm paid Rs. 3,177/-for the same which amount, it is alleged was short by Rs. 71/- of the price due under the contract. The plaintiff firm then offered on 28-6-1948 200 dozen "Tara" and 30 dozen "Fancy" laces by means of a registered letter sent through an Advocate of this Court. This notice suggests that there was already a dispute between the parties because generally business people do not send notices through their counsel unless a dispute has already started. It is admitted that the offer was only for the supply of lace in one colour namely black and in no other colour. The defendant firm similarly replied through their counsel on 6-7-1948 and refused to accept the goods offered unless they were supplied in assortment of colours as was previously done. The defendant firm also stated in this letter that the goods were seasonal and should have been supplied by the end of June as was orally agreed upon between the parties. The plaintiff firm offered further supplies in the same black colour on 29-7-1948 without acknowledging the receipt of the letter sent by the defendants on 5-71948, but there is no doubt that the plaintiff firm had received the letter of the defendants in due course. The plaintiff firm then alleged that they sold part of the goods offered on 28-7-1948 under the terms of the contract at the defendants' cost and in fact informed the defendants by letter dated 6-8-1948 that they had sold 100 dozen "Tara" and 50 dozen "Fancy" and had incurred a loss of Rs. 750/for which the defendants were held liable. It is in this letter that the plaintiff firm stated that there was no term in the contract under which assortments of colours were to be supplied to the defendants, and in this very letter they offered the remaining quantities of ribbons due under the contract. The case of the plaintiff firm then is that the contract goods were sold between 7-11-1948 and 31-1-1949. On 18-8-1951 the plaintiff firm informed the defendant firm that the plaintiff firm had suffered a loss of Rs. 6,623/8/- which the defendants were liable to make good. The present suit was filed on 25-8-1951 on a court-fee of Re. 1/- in the Court of the Senior Sub Judge, Amritsar, for the recovery of damages amounting to Rs. 5,623/8/- although in the body of the plaint it was stated correctly that the value for the purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction was the amount claimed from the defendants.
(3.) The defendant firm repudiated its liability to pay the amount claimed by the plaintiff firm and 'inter alia' pleaded that (1) the suit was barred by time, (2) the plaintiff was guilty of breach of the contract, and (3) there was no sale of the contract goods, and in any case there was no sale in accordance with law.;