The Judgment of the Court was as follows:—
On the 5th May, 1939, the Defendants agreed to take delivery of 10 bags of sugar at Rs. 13-2-0 per maund within seven days. They broke the contract. The Plaintiff served a registered notice upon them on the 15th June, 1939. He eventually sold the sugar on the 25th June, 1939, at Rs. 11-4-0 per maund. The present suit was instituted to recover the difference in the ??? The question for determination is ??? the measure of damages is the price of the sugar on the date of the breach or on the date of the sale. The Munsif held the former and as there was no difference in the price he dismissed the suit.
In support of the Rule Mr. Mukherji relied on sec. 44 of the Sale of Goods Act. That section deals with quite a different matter. The measure of damages is provided for not under sec. 56 of the Sale of Goods Act but under sec. 73 of the Contract Act (vide sec. 3 of the Sale of Goods Act). There is nothing in the section to support the Plaintiffs' case. The date of the sale is a matter entirely within the volition of the seller. He may defer it in accordance with the view he takes of the market. In fact in the present case the Plaintiff could have sold the sugar earlier at a profit.
The Defendant's case is supported by the decision of their Lordships of the Judicial Committee in the case of A.K.A.S Jamal v. Moolla Dawood Sons & Co. . The case of Mackeritch v. Nobo Coomar Ray though converse to the present case also supports that view. A similar view has been taken in Madras and Bombay.
The Rule is accordingly discharged with costs—Hearing-fee being assessed at one gold mohur.
P.C
Comments