Chhunna Mal Ram Nath vs. Mool Chand Ram Bhagat

Chhunna Mal Ram Nath vs.  Mool Chand Ram Bhagat

(1928) 30 BOMLR 837

Key Words: breach, recovery of damages, sale, delivery, dispensing with the performance

FACTS

Plaintiffs entered into contract for taking deliveries of the goods packed in wooden boxes from the defendants, which latter was to secure from London. Since British government prohibited the supply of such goods in wooden boxes, hence, defendants offered to supply the goods in bales to which plaintiffs refused and “cancel[ed] the goods” without claiming any compensation thereof in any of the correspondences. Plaintiffs later claimed damages for non-delivery.

ISSUE

Whether plaintiffs can claim any compensation.

HELD

Plaintiffs upon the ancillary breach of defendants claimed to have ‘put an end to the contract’ u/s 39; however, it is the plaintiffs themselves who by wrongfully refusing to take deliveries under the contract have given a chance to defendants to ‘put an end to it’. Nevertheless, defendants did not exercise this option and by acquiescence continued it; but Plaintiffs by insisting on “cancel[lation] of goods” to be supplied by the defendants, had expressly dispensed with the performance by the latter such that no claim for damages could be brought against the any breach by latter.

Author: Vishrut Kansal

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s