Judgement

Consolidated Appeal (No. 64 of 1930) from two decrees of the High Court (September 22, 1927) affirming two decrees of the Subordinate Judge at Bapatla (March 31, 1923).

The appeal arose out of two suits, but in substance related only to a suit (No. 86 of 1919) brought by the appellants, as sellers, against the respondents, as buyers, claiming damages for the breach of contracts made in August, 1918, for the sale of yarn. The contracts, which specified no time for delivery, had been partly performed, but on January 3, 1919, the buyers had refused to take further deliveries on the ground that an unreasonable time had elapsed since the date of the contracts. Both Courts in India had dismissed the suit, holding that a reasonable time for delivery had expired at latest by the end of November, 1918.

The facts of the case appear from the judgment of the Judicial Committee.

1935. Jan. 21, 22, 24. Dunne K. C. and Subba Row for the appellants. Although under s. 46 of the Indian Contract Act performance of the contracts had to be within a reasonable time, the appellants, under s. 93, were not bound to deliver until the respondents applied for delivery. As they had not done so there