Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.-This appeal and the memorandum of objections are against the judgment of our learned brother Panchapakesa. Ayyar, J., in C.S. No. 363 of 1949 on the Original Side of this Court. The suit was one by a buyer for recovery of damages for non-delivery, and the claim made was for Rs. 51,499-6-0. The learned Judge held, that the defendants, (the sellers) were in default, and decreed the suit to the extent of Rs. 3,000. The plaintiff has filed this appeal, and the excess amount claimed in it, is confined to Rs. 17,349. The defendants (sellers) have filed a memo, of cross-objections, disputing the learned Judge’s finding regarding breach on their part, and on this basis pray for the setting aside of the decree for Rs. 3,000 passed against them.

The two points therefore that arise for consideration are: (1) The correctness of the finding of the learned trial Judge that it was the defendants who were guilty of breaking the contract. (2) The correctness of the quantum of damages awarded to the plaintiff. These we shall consider in that order. Before setting out or examining the details of the controversy between the parties bearing on the first of these points, it would

Click Here to Read the rest of this document