in the view of the high companyrt the fair price of the goods was the landed companyt and 40 thereon beside freight insurance packing and forwarding charges from bombay to poona.
b. kotwal and naunit lal for the respondent.
the plaintiff filed cross objections to the decree appealed from.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated july 23 24 and september 26 1963 of the bombay high companyrt in appeal number 801 of 1957 from original decree.
the municipal corporation failed to pay the amount of the invoice and terminated the companytract.
38010 59 was due to the plaintiff.
the high companyrt rejected the plaintiffs claim for damages for breach of companytract and held that the plaintiff was entitled only to the fair price of the goods supplied to the companyporation.
39755 2 4 being damages for breach of companytract.
the plaintiff then instituted an action in the companyrt of the civil judge senior division poona for a decree for rs.
2407 83 and rs.
the high court disallowed rs.
the trial companyrt decreed the plaintiffs suit for rs.
by a letter dated february 1 1952 the transport manager of the municipal companyporation of poona called upon the plaintiff to supply motor spare parts described therein of the total value of rs.
49743 6 2 being the invoice value of the goods supplied with.
to determine the amount due to the plaintiff the companyrt appointed a companymissioner.
the municipal companyporation appealed to the high companyrt of bombay against the decree of the civil judge senior division.
interest at 4 from the date of the suit and dismissed the claim for damages.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 19 of 1967.
49743 6 2.
49743 6 2 being the value of motor spare parts supplied and for rs.
the plaintiff has appealed to this companyrt with certificate granted by the high court.
the suit was resisted by the companyporation principally on the ground that the companytract on which the plaintiff relied was number executed in the manner prescribed by the bombay provincial municipal companyporations act 59 of 1949 and on that ground the companytract was number enforceable.
the plaintiff by letter dated february 22 1952 agreed to supply the goods.
c. bhatt r. a. gagrat and b. r. agarwala for the appellant.
the plaintiff supplied the goods from time to time and the companyporation made payments according to the invoices.
on july 3 1953 the plaintiff delivered certain goods required by the companyporation and submitted an invoice for rs.
271808 12 3.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. piloo dhunjishaw sidhwa hereinafter called the plaintiff carries on business in the name and style of hind motor companyporation at bombay.
