Bombay High Court Allows Recovery Suit for Cotton Price and Interest — Contract Deemed Accepted Under Clause 33. The court held that the defendant was liable to pay the price of cotton bales and other charges with interest at 20% per annum.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 91
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The plaintiff, The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., filed a suit for recovery of Rs.15,78,006.49 along with interest at 20% per annum against the defendant, The Co-operative Textile Mills Ltd. The dispute arose from a contract for the purchase of 500 bales of Sudan Cotton. The All India Federation of Cooperative Spinning Mills Ltd. requested the plaintiff to book the cotton on behalf of the defendant, which was confirmed by the defendant. The plaintiff sent a standard form contract bearing no.G/655 dated 12.5.77 to the defendant. Clause 33 of the contract provided that if the duplicate copy was not returned duly signed within seven days, it would be deemed accepted. The defendant did not return the signed copy. The plaintiff imported 474 bales of Sudan Cotton at Rs.5150 per candy CIF Bombay and informed the defendant. The defendant failed to pay. The court held that the contract was binding due to deemed acceptance under Clause 33. The plaintiff was entitled to recover the claimed amount with interest. The suit was decreed in favor of the plaintiff.

Headnote

A) Contract Law - Formation of Contract - Deemed Acceptance - Clause 33 of Contract - Where the duplicate copy of the agreement was not returned duly signed within seven days, it was deemed to have been accepted by the mill - The court held that the contract was concluded and binding on the defendant (Paras 2-3).

B) Contract Law - Liability for Price and Charges - Sale of Goods - The defendant was liable to pay the price of cotton bales at Rs.5150 per candy CIF Bombay along with other charges as agreed - The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of Rs.15,78,006.49 with interest at 20% per annum (Paras 1, 3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a binding contract existed between the parties for the sale of cotton and whether the defendant is liable to pay the price and charges with interest.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Suit decreed in favor of the plaintiffs for recovery of Rs.15,78,006.49 with interest at 20% per annum.

Law Points

  • Contract formation by deemed acceptance
  • liability for price and charges
  • interest on delayed payment
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2005 LawText (BOM) (08) 146

SUIT NO.1652 OF 1980

2005-08-02

S.U. Kamdar, J

Mr. R.C. Shah i/b M/s. Divekar & Co. for the plaintiffs, Mr. S.V. Shetty for the defendants

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for recovery of money

Remedy Sought

Recovery of Rs.15,78,006.49 with interest at 20% per annum

Filing Reason

Non-payment for imported cotton bales

Issues

Whether a binding contract existed between the parties? Whether the defendant is liable to pay the price and charges with interest?

Submissions/Arguments

Plaintiff argued that the contract was deemed accepted under Clause 33 as the defendant did not return the signed copy within seven days. Defendant's arguments are not mentioned in the provided text.

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was concluded and binding on the defendant due to deemed acceptance under Clause 33, and the defendant is liable to pay the price and charges with interest.

Judgment Excerpts

Clause 33 of the said contract reads as under: '33. If the duplicate copy of this agreement is not returned by the Mills duly signed within seven days from the receipt of this agreement, it will be deemed to have been accepted by the mill.'

Procedural History

Suit filed in 1980; judgment delivered on 02.08.2005.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Eyewitnesses and Inconsistent Medical Evidence. Trial Court's Acquittal Upheld as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Section 302 ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Recovery Suit for Cotton Price and Interest — Contract Deemed Accepted Under Clause 33. The court held that the defendant was liable to pay the price of cotton bales and other charges with interest at 20% per annum.