ORDER

Bennet, J. - This is a civil revision by a defendant against a decree of the Small Cause Court awarding the plaintiff a refund of Rs. 62-3-0, purchase money. The admitted facts are that the applicant defendant Chhotku sold the wood of two trees which had fallen down to the plaintiff. The plaintiff cut up these trees but when he attempted to remove them from the grove of the defendant he was prevented from doing so by defendant 2. Learned Counsel has argued that plaintiff should not have obtained a decree and that his remedy should have been against defendant 2. It is true that the Court below has held that the wood belonged to defendant 1 and that defendant 1 stopped the plaintiff from taking the wood. The question between the plaintiff and defendant 1 is under the Sale of Goods Act and Section 33 lays down that delivery may be effected as follows:

Delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be; treated as delivery or which has the effected putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorised to hold them on his behalf.

2. There was no agreement between the parties that anything should be treated as delivery and ther