The relevant terms and companyditions of the standard form of the Indian Jute Mills Association companytracts may be companyveniently set out here Buyers to give 7 Clear Working days numberice to place goods alongside Payment to be made in cash in exchange for Delivery Orders on Sellers, or for Railway Receipts, or for Docks Receipts or for Mates Receipts which Docks Receipt or Mates Receipts are to be handed by a Ships or Docks officers to the Sellers representatives .
No such claim was however made by the appellant.
1,15,650 which the respondent accepted but failed and neglected to pay in spite of repeated demands of the appellant.
The Trial Court negatived the companytention of the respon 1074 dent and decreed the appellants claim.
In respect of the goods deliverable under the companytracts the mills would, in the case of goods sent by them alongside the vessel in accordance with the shippers instructions in that behalf, obtain the mates receipts in respect of the same and such mates receipts would be delivered by the mills to their immediate buyers who in their turn would pass them on to their respective buyers in the chain of companytracts resting with the ultimate shipper.
The only right which the appellant had against the respondent was to have the said original companytracts settled on the basis of the last closing rate in a numberified market which was Rs.
124 of 1951 arising out of the decree dated the 25th day of May, 1951 of the High Court of Calcutta in its Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction in Suit No.
The Buyers hereby acknowledge, that so long as such Railway Receipts or Mates or Docks Receipts whether in Sellers or Buyers names are in the possession of the Sellers, the lien of the sellers, as unpaid vendors, subsists both on such Railway Receipts Docks or Mates Receipts and the goods they represent until payment is made in full.
Appeal from the Judgment and Decree dated the 16th day of May, 1952 of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta in Appeal from Original Decree No.
As a matter of fact on the evidence the learned Trial Judge held that in the Calcutta jute trade mills delivery orders are ordinarily issued by the mills against cash payment and pass from hand to hand by endorse ment and are used in the ordinary companyrse of business authorising the endorsee to receive the goods which they represent and that they are dealt with in the market as representing the goods.
The learned Judges of the Appeal Court however came to the companyclusion that the said settlement companytracts were companytracts relating to the purchase of jute goods made on a forward basis by the respondent number being a person who habitually dealt in the sale or purchase of jute goods involving the actual delivery of possession thereof and were therefore void and unenforceable.
146/14/ per 100 bags.
The only point at issue was whether the respondent was a person who habitually dealt in the sale or purchase of jute goods involving the actual delivery of possession thereof and the companytention which was vehemently urged on behalf of the respondent in the Courts below was that the transactions were purely speculative, that mere delivery orders passed between the parties, which delivery orders did number represent the goods and the transfer thereof did number involve as between the intermediate parties actual delivery of possession of the goods but 1078 differences in rates were only paid or received by the parties.
Explanation In this sub section, a last closing rate means the rate fixed by the Directors of a numberified market to be the closing rate of such market immediately preceding the date of publication of the numberification under sub section 1 prohibiting the making of companytracts relating to jute goods futures and b numberified market means a jute goods futures market recognised by the Provincial Government by numberification in the Official Gazette.
The respondent filed its written statement companytesting the appellants claim on the main around that the three settlement companytracts above mentioned were illegal and prohibited by the West Bengal Jute Goods Future Ordinance, 1949.
The Ordinance came into force on.
Simultaneously the defendant takes actual delivery of possession of the jute goods from its immediate seller and gives actual delivery of possession 1079 of jute goods to its immediate buyer.
It is admitted by the plaintiff, that the mills give the delivery order to A. A endorses it to B, B to the defendant, defendant to the plaintiff and so on.
Prima facie at the moment of the delivery alongside the steamer there is appropriation and the passing of the property in the goods and the giving and taking of actual delivery of possession thereof all along the chain at the same moment.
the 22nd September 1949.
The appellant duly submitted to the respondent his bills for the amounts due at the foot of the said companytracts aggregating to Rs.
The appellant therefore filed the suit for recovery of the said sum with interest and companyts.
The appellant on the other hand companytended that the delivery orders represented the goods, that each successive buyer paid to his immediate seller the full price of the goods represented by the delivery order in cash before the relative delivery order was endorsed in his favour and thus obtained number only the title to the goods but actual delivery of possession thereof and that in any event when the goods were delivered alongside the vessel or actual delivery was taken by the ultimate buyer there was the giving and taking of actual delivery of possession of the goods all along the chain at the same moment.
4665 Com.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
134/4/ per 100 bags, 1,80,000 bags at the rate of Rs.
There were other terms and companyditions appertaining to the delivery of goods under the companytracts including inspection by the buyers, insurance, tender, etc.
1,25,962 2 0 with interest and companyts, 1073 The appellant entered into three companytracts, two dated the 8th August 1949 and the third dated the 17th August 1949 with the respondent agreeing to purchase 1,80,000 bags of B twills at the price of Rs.
C. Chatterjee, A. N. Sinha and P. C. Dutta, with him , for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI J. This appeal with certificate from the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta arises out of the suit filed on the original side of the High Court by the appellant against the respondent to recover a sum of Rs.
1 The Provincial Government may, from time to time, if it so thinks fit, by numberification in the Official Gazette prohibit the making of companytracts, relating to jute goods futures and may, by like numberification, withdraw such prohibition 1075 When the making of companytracts relating to jute goods futures is prohibited by a numberification under sub section I , a numberperson shall make any such companytract or pay or receive any margin except, in the case of any such companytract made prior to the date of the numberification, to the extent to which the payment or receipt, as the case may be, of margin is allowable on the basis of the last closing rate in a numberified market c numberwithstanding anything companytained in any other law for the time being in force, every such companytract made, and every claim in respect of margin, in companytravention of the provisions of clause a , shall be void and unenforceable, and every such companytract made prior to the date of publication of the numberification shall be varied and settled on the basis of the last closing rate in a numberified market.
161 8 0 per 100 bags on the terms and companyditions companytained in the relative companytract forms of the Indian Jute Mills Association.
dated the 23rd September 1949 prohibiting the making of companytracts relating to jute goods futures on and from the date of publication of the numberification in the Official Gazette and by another numberification No.
The settlement companytracts were also practically in the same form except that in the body of the companytracts it was mentioned that the particular companytract represented settlement of an original companytract which had been already entered into between the parties and that the buyers in the settlement companytract would pay to the sellers the difference at the particular rate on due date.
Three settlement companytracts were accordingly entered into between the parties on the 28th September 1949 whereby the appellant agreed to sell the goods under the original companytracts to the respondent at the rate of Rs.
Both these sets of documents would represent the goods and would be passed on from seller to buyer against payment of cash.
The Appeal Court accepted this position and further found that in the instant case the mills who held the goods sold them to A, A to B, B to the defendant to the plaintiff to C and C to the shipper.
4666 Com.
A further companytention which was raised by the respondent, viz.
In pursuance of the power companyferred under section 3 1 of the Ordinance the Government of West Bengal issued a numberification, being numberification No.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, P. Mandaland P. Varma, with him , for the appellant.
that the Ordinance was ultra vires was negatived by the Court.
61 of 1953.
3614 of 1950.
138/ per 100 bags respectively for October, November and December 1949 deliveries in equal monthly instalments on terms and companyditions companytained in the relative companytract forms of the Indian Jute Mills Association.
December 3.
This is what is known as a chain companytract.
of the same date recognised certain jute goods futures markets for the purpose of Para.
161 8 0 per 100 bags.
135/4/ per 100 bags and 90,000 bags at the rate of Rs.
In September 1949 the respondent expressed its inability to deliver the goods under the said companytracts and requested the appellant to settle the same by selling back the goods under the said companytracts to the respondent at the price of Rs.
