Judgement

Appeal (No. 107 of 1926) from a decree of the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction (April 29, 1925) varying a decree of that Court in its original jurisdiction.

The appellant firm brought a suit against the respondent firm in the High Court claiming Rs.65,255, the price of yarn sold and delivered under three contracts made in Madras. As to part of the goods there

Law Rep. 55 Ind. App. 32 ( 1927- 1928) Sukdevdoss Ramprasad, Firm V. Govindoss C haturbhujadoss 234

had been actual deliveries, and the present appeal related only to a contract of November 21, 1922, by which the appellants sold 100 bales to the respondents. The defendants pleaded in effect (1.) that there had been no delivery ; (2.) that the contract was a wagering contract.

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

The trial judge (Coutts-Trotter J.) decreed the whole claim. c In his view the documents handed to the defendants were delivery orders, upon which delivery could have been demanded. He rejected the plea of wagering on the ground that it was not proved that there was a definite agreement or understanding that delivery should not in any event take place ; it was not sufficient