The unauthorized sale of goods by one party constitutes a breach of contract, entitling the other party to recover payments made along with interest.

JUDGMENT :

PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.

1. Present Appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’ for short) by the original defendant being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the Judge, Commercial Court, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Commercial Court’ for short) in Commercial Civil Suit No. 359 of 2021.

2. The appellant is the original defendant in the Civil Suit whereas respondent is the original plaintiff. For sake of brevity, the parties are referred to as per the cause-title of the Civil Suit.

3. The controversy which has resulted in filing of the present appeal is that an oral contract was entered into in the year 1987 between the plaintiff and the defendant qua purchase of Isabgul. The goods were to be purchased through the defendant. The terms of the oral contract indicated that 25% of the purchase value of Isabgul had to be paid by the plaintiff and the rest of the amount, i.e. 75% was to be invested by the defendant for which the plaintiff was liable to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum. Further, it was agreed between plaintiff and the defendant to store Isabgul (hereinafter referred to as ‘the goods’ for short) from time to time in defendant’s godown in Unjha and plaintiff had agreed to pay rent for the same at the end of each year. In total, 5239 bags of Isabgul were purchased. It was further agreed that the defendant will charge commission from the plaintiff for such purchases. It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had agreed and were duty bound to store and continue to store the goods in their godown till the plaintiff desired. As per plaintiff, the defendant had categorically agreed for the same. It was the case of the defendant that they had sent demand for various amounts as payment to the defendant upto 31.3.1990. The amount were towards 25% of the purchase price, godown rent, interest and commission. It was the case of the plaintiff that they had paid in total an amount of Rs.49,10,026.79 paise to the defendant.

4. It was the case of the plaintiff that the goods purchased were stored in the godown of the defendant from 1987 onwards. Time and again, the plaintiff had made payment for the same and the last payment was made in April, 1990, which was acknowledged by the defendant.

5. However, in the year 1993, the defendant raised some dispute with regard to the percentage of price of payment to be made by the plaintiff to the defendant. In wake of such controversy, the defendant sold the goods stored in the godown in the year 1993. The defendant intimated the plaintiff by way of communication dated 9.7.1993 and 10.7.1993, informing the plaintiff that they had sold 3089 bags of goods as well as another set of 2190 bags of goods at the rate of Rs.190/- per 20 kg.

6. It was the case of the plaintiff that the sale made by the defendant was illegal and void. The defendant had sold the goods without the permission of the plaintiff dehors the contractual obligation and with an ulterior motive. It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had no authority or right to sell the goods and the action of the defendant was without the consent of the plaintiff and hence was illegal, arbitrary and unjust. It was further the case of the plaintiff that they had made payment of almost Rs.49 lakh, which was not disputed by the defendant. Despite such payment, the goods were illegally