Ahmad, J.

1. This appeal is by the plaintiff. Mr. Nandlal Untwalia, whose name appears for the respon-dents, has informed us that he has no instruction to oppose the appeal. We have heard. Mr. B. C. De for the appellant.

2. The plaintiff is the wife of the Maharaja Bahadur of Dumraon. She. through her manager, Mr. H. Knight, entered into an agreement with. the two defendants, who are father and son, for the purchase of net-weaving and hosiery machines which had been installed at Barraekpore, Calcutta. The price fixed for the net-weaving machinery was Rs. 60,000.00 and that for the hosiery machinery Rs. 40,000/-, the total being Rs. 1,00,000/-. The agreement for sale was drawn up between the parties on 13-1-1945. Under this agreement, a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 out of the price was to be paid on that very date, and it was so paid. Another sum of Rs. 25,000.00 was to be paid when the sale deed regarding the machinery was completed. This sum was paid on 7-2-1945, when the bale deed was drawn up. A further sum of Rs. 40,000.00 was to be paid when the machines would be despatched to Dumraon, and this took place on 9-2-1945. The balance of Rs. 25,000.00 was payable when the machines