JAIN, J.—Sujanmal, one of the plaintiffs, has challenged the appellate decree by which the plaintiffs suit for damages for breach of contract for Rs. 1371.25 against the first and second respondents, has been dismissed.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Manmal (third respondent) and his son Sujanmal (appellant) as the proprietors of the Hindu undivided family firm Messrs Dhoolchand Manmal, Chhoti Sadri, instituted a suit in the Court of Munsif, Chhoti Sadri, for the recovery of Rs. 1371.25 as damages for breach of contract against Radhey Shyam and his father Jainarayan (first and second respondents) as proprietors of the Hindu undivided family firm Messrs Jainarayan Radhey Shyam, Neemach Cant (M.P.). The case, as disclosed in the plaint, is that on 27-12 63 Radhey Shyam agreed to supply 200 tins of Rasada Vanaspati at the rate of Rs. 44/- per tin (16.500) to the plaintiffs firm F.O.R. Chhoti Sadri This agreement was in writing and signed by Radhey Shyam in favour of the plaintiffs firm. The document is Ex. 1 on record. According to the plaintiffs the defendants did not. supply the goods as agreed to by contract Ex. 1. Instead by letter Ex. 2 dated 2-1-61 defendant Radhey Sh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document