SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1935 Supreme(SC) 38

SIR SHADI LAL, LORD ATKIN, SIR JOHN WALLIS
HOE KIM SEING – Appellant
Versus
MAUNG BA CHIT – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitor for appellant : J. E. Lambert.
Solicitors for respondent: Cutler, Allingham & Ford.

Judgement

Appeal (No. 76 of 1934) from a decree of the High Court (June 21, 1933) reversing a decree of the District Court of Pegu (September 29, 1930).

Contracts were made for the purchase of paddy by Bought and Sold Notes, counterparts of each other. The material terms of the notes were as follows, the sale of a second lot of 7000 baskets of paddy being on similar terms to the sale of the first lot of 21,000 baskets —

" Deed of Sale of Paddy.

Sale of paddy (lying) in the granary is made at Peinzalok Town and the terms are as follows

On the 24th April, 1930, the whole contents about 21,000 baskets in total of kauknge paddy from 3 rooms in U Maung Gyis granary belonging to U Po Thin are sold at the rate of Rs. 160 per hundred baskets of paddy. (Baskets and methods of measurement described.) As regards the date for taking delivery of paddy, if the paddy is taken within one month from the date of the execution of the deed, it shall be taken on payment of money. The buyer shall pay the money fully in respect of the remaining paddy which has been left in the granary. (The seller undertakes the paddy shall be uniform &c.) The buyer Mg. Ba Them (in plural) makes the purchase on payment o


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top