T. N. Mehrotra.
1 and 50 bales of Banaras Hemp No.
Against this decree the respondent preferred an appeal and the main point which was urged on its behalf was directed against the finding of the trial judge that the companytract had been entered into by the appellant for itself and number on account of the disclosed principal.
Please numbere and companyfirm.
377 dated 18 12 50.
delivery K. P. Docks during January March 1951.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated March 1, 1957, of the calcutta High Court in appeal from original Decree No.
that the said letters companyld be companysidered for ascertaining the terms.
To M s. Tayeballi Dawoodbhai, 20, Zakaria Street, Calcutta.
Inspite of the repeated demands made by the appellant the respondent failed to deliver the balance of the goods companytracted for and thus companymitted breach of the companytract.
1 only with A. G. Mark.
Yours faithfully, For T. N. Mehrotra Co., Sd.
In they transaction the respondent realised Rs.
In his opinion the bought and sold numberes issued by the brokers Constituted the sole basis for the terms.
Yours faithfully, For T. N. Mehrotra and Company, Sd.
By this companytract the respondent agreed to sell 1000 bales of Banaras Hemp particulars of which were set out in the plaint.
After this judgement was delivered the appellant applied for and obtained a certificate from the High Court and it is with the said certificate that the present appeal has been brought before this Court.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. This appeal by a certificate granted by the Calcutta High Court arises out of a suit filed by the three appellants against the respondent to recover Rs.
Calcutta, 18 12 1950.
Messrs. Radhakrishna Shivadutt Rai, Banaras.
Dear Sirs, We companyfirm having sold on your account and risk, the under numbered goods, to M s. Radakrishan Shiv Dutt Rai with A. G. Mark.
Calcutta, 15th January, 1951.
October 13.
Brokerage 0 8 O per bale.
This amount was claimed as damages for the breach of companytract.
Sales Tax number should be finished by the buyer otherwise to be charged.
K. P. Docks delivery during January March 1951.
The principal companytention urged by the respondent, however, was that in relation to the companytract in suit the appellant had acted as agent for its disclosed principal Messrs Khaitan and Sons Ltd., and as such it was number entitled to bring the present suit.
N. Mehrotra and Co. No.
In addition an amount of Rs.
Calcutta 1.
500 Five hundred bales Banaras No.
Terms of Payment on receipt of goods.
Yours faithfully, for Tayeballi Dawoodbhai.
3,840 made by L. N. Poddar company was, however, held number to have been proved.
1 only with Agmark Jan March 51 at K. P. Docks Rs.
71 of 1954.
In the result a decree was passed in favour of the appellant for Rs.
165 per bale of about 400 Ibs.
delivery K. P. Docks during January March 1951.
Any dispute in companynection with this deal is subject to arbitration by Bengal Chamber of Commerce.
Das Gupta, J., upheld this.
Signature Gopal Lal Gupta For Radhakrishna Sivadutt Rai.
respondent.
We acknowledge receipt of your purchase companyfirmation memo No.
The three appellants are respectively the Firm Radhakrishan Shivdutt Rai which carries on business at Banaras and RamKumar Lal for himself and as karta of his joint family as well as Madan Gopal for himself and as karta of his joint family, the latter two being the partners in the first mentioned Firm Radhakrishna Sivadutta Rai for companyvenience we will refer to the partnership firm hereafter as the appellant.
delivery E. P. Docks during January March 1951.
II with agmark Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
9,80 j as difference between the market rate on March 31, 1951, and the companytract rate of the balance deliverable under the companytract in suit.
1951 the respondent wrote a letter to the appellant.
212 of 1959.
165 per bale of 400 Ibs.
2 this delivery was Made by the respondent to L. N. Poddar Co., who acted as the agent of the appellant and Paid the price of the said 160 bales.
We acknowledge receipt of your purchase companyfirmation memo.
Mr. Justice Bose who tried the suit framed twelve issues.
A c Khetan and Sons Ltd., Shewpur, Banaras.
Dear Sirs, We companyfirm having purchased on your account and risk under numbered goods from Messrs. Tayeballi Dawoodbhai, 20, Zakaria Street, Calcutta.
After the said numberes were sent by the brokers to the respective parties Gopal Lal Gupta on behalf of the appellant wrote a letter to the respondent on January 3, 1951, and on January 15.
3,840 was claimed as having been paid in excess of tho value of 160 bales delivered to L. N. Poddar Co., on behalf of the appellant.
Of the companytract and the two letters subsequently written on January 3 and 15, 1951, were inadmissible and irrelevant for the purpose of determining the said terms of the companytract.
1 with agmark Rs.
165 per bale of 400 lbs.
Yours faithfully, for Radhakrishna Shivdutt Rai Sd.
Bachawat, J., differed from Das Gupta, J., on the question about the relevance and admissibility of the two subsequent letters.
This companyfirms your letter of 3rd instant.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the respondent.
The learned judge also found that the respondent had companymitted a breach of the companytract as alleged by the appellant.
500 Five hundred bales Banaras No.
20, Zakaria Street, Calcutta.
II with Agmark at Rs.
This companytract was later companyfirmed by two letters written respectively on January 3 and 15, 1951, by the appellant to the respondent and replied to by the.
145 per bale of about 400 lbs.
83,640/ .
These letters read at follows Messrs. Tayeballi Dawoodbhai, 3 1 51.
Delivery Jan. March 1951 at K. P. Dock.
That is how the appellant claimed Rs.
N. Poddar Co. in excess of the actual price of the goods delivered to the said companypany.
166 one hundred and sixtyfive per bale of about 400 lbs.
79,800 along with interest as stipulated in the decree.
Dear sirs, We have boughS from you one thousand bales of Banaras Hemp through Messrs. T. N. Mehrotra Co., 28 A, Pollock Street, Calcutta, on the following terms 1.
Copy to Messrs. T. N. Mehrotra Co., Calcutta, and to Gopinath Mehrotra, Banaras.
Radhakrishna Sivadutta Rai, A c Khetan and Sons Ltd., Shewpur, Banaras.
The appellants case was that the appellant and the respondent had entered into a companytract in the first instance on December 18, 1980, through brokers named T. N. Mehrotra company,Calcutta.
378 dated 18 12 50.
The respondent further alleged that the said disclosed principal Messrs. Khaitan and J. Sons had settled all their rights and loams under the suit companytract with their agent and so the present claim for damages was number maintainable.
In regard to the claim for Rs.
Of the companytract and came to the companyclusion that can reading the said letters and the bought and sold numberes together the result was the same, namely, that the companytract had been entered into by the appellant on behalf of the disclosed principal.
The appellants case with regard to the excess payment of Rs.
The respondent Tayeballi Dawoodbhai is a partnership firm which carries on business at Calcutta.
T. N. Mehrotra To M s. T. N. Mehrotra Co., Calcutta.
500 Five hundred bales Banaras Hemp No.
Tayoballi Dawoodbhai 20, Zakaria Street, Registered.
The said companyfirmation slips were signed by Gopal Lal Gupta for the firm of Radhakrishna Shivdutt Rai.
378 Hemp, oil and oil Seeds Pollock House Brokers 3rd Floor Bank 4718 29 A Pollock street Tel K. 1914 Calcutta, 18 12 50.
Of the companytract and numberother evidence was relevant and admissible in order to determine the said terms.
I with Agmark at Rs.
S. Pathak and Naunit Lal, for the appellants.
To M s. T. N. Mehrotra Co., Calcutta.
145 one hundred and fortyfive per bale of about 400 lbs.
each on receipt of the goods.
3,840 from the said I,.
Price Rs.
Commodity 500 Five hundred Bales of Banaras No.
Dear Sirs, We companyfirm having sold to you through Messrs. T. N. Mehrotra Co., Calcutta, 1000 one thousand bales of Banaras Hemp as follows 500 Five hundred bales Banaras Hemp No.
Gopal Lal Gupta.
According to the appellant, by a letter written on March 14, 1951, the appellant in part performance of the said companytract accepted delivery of 110 bales of Banaras Hemp No.
and the two letters between them companystituted the terms of the companytract.
Commodity 500 five hundred bales of Banaras No.
Several other pleas were also raised but with the said pleas we are number companycerned in the present appeal.
3,840 tho respondent pleaded that the appellants case was untrue.
Signature Gopal Lal Gupta For Radhakrishna Shivadutta Rai.
Tho learned judge, however, companysidered tho matter also on the alternative basis.
This claim was resisted by the respondent on several grounds.
This companytention was based in the Court of Appeal, as in the trial companyrt, on the bought and sold numberes and it was urged that the bought and sold numberes clearly showed that the appellant had entered into the companytract on account of the disclosed principal Messrs. Khaitan and Sons Ltd. Before the Appellate Court the respondents case was that the said bought and sold numberes companystituted the terms.
however, agreed with the companyclusion alternatively recorded by Das Gupta, J., and held that the four documents supported the respondents plea that the appellant had entered into the companytract on behalf of the disclosed principal.
Sales Tax number should be furnished by the Buyers otherwise to be charged.
