(A) Sales of Goods Act - Sections 12(2), 16(1)(a), 16(1)(b), 17, 41, and 42 - Breach of contract - Plaintiff claims Defendants failed to deliver a tipper lorry in roadworthy condition and in timely manner, Defendants counterclaim for specific performance and additional costs - Court finds: Defendants breached implied conditions regarding quality and fitness of goods, lorry not roadworthy nor fit for purpose - Claim for damages established, counterclaim dismissed. (Paras 1-8)

(B) Implied Conditions - Quality and fitness of goods - Sale by sample - Court holds that the lorry delivered did not conform to the sample provided, failing to meet quality standards necessary for the Plaintiff’s construction work; relies upon the applicability of statutory provisions for assessing quality. (Paras 3-4)

(C) Damages - Plaintiff entitled to refund of deposit and repair costs attributable to the breach by the Defendants, with interest awarded. (Para 8)

Findings of Court:
The Plaintiff entitled to (a) a refund of RM24,160.00, (b) repair costs of RM464.00, and (c) interest at 8% per annum on the sums awarded from the filing date until settlement.

Issues: The court addressed whether the Defendants failed to deliver a lorry that was fit for purpose and whether the sale was based on a sample.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Defendants breached implied conditions regarding the quality and condition of the lorry delivered, leading the Plaintiff to incur additional costs as a result of reliance on the Defendants' skills and representations.

Result: Judgment entered for the Plaintiff.