9911796707
TMI Blog1958 (3) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the respondent on July 25, 1942. The delivery of these goods was to be given in the month of October 1942. 3. On August 9, 1942, the workers in the respondent mills went on strike in sympathy with the Quit-India movement which had then commenced. In consequence, the respondent wrote to the appellants' firm on August 15, 1942, and stated that, in view of the strike and the political situation, the delivery time of all the pending contracts should be automatically understood as extended for the period the working of the mills was stopped and until the normal state of affairs recurred. The strike came to an end and the mills resumed working on November 22, 1942. On December 5, 1942, Jasubhai, who was then in charge of the management of the mills was approached by the appellants, Keshavlal and Ratilal, for obtaining delivery of the goods. He, however, told them that the appellants' contracts were void and so no delivery could be claimed or given. On December 6, 1942, the said Jasubhai wrote to the appellants informing them that their contracts were not binding on the mills as they were null and void. It may be mentioned at this stage that, when the contracts were made be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oved, it was not possible to ascribe any certain or definite meaning to the words used by the respondent in its letter dated August 15, 1942 (Ex.P. 78), and so this agreement to extend time was void since it was vague and uncertain. That is why it was held that the appellants' suit was barred by time. It is these findings which are challenged before us by the appellants in the present appeal. It is obvious that the value of the claim in the trial court as well as before us is more than ₹ 20,000 and the judgment of the High Court under appeal has reversed the decree passed by the learned trial judge. The appellants are thus entitled to agitate both questions of fact and of law before us in this appeal. 6. The first point which has been urged before us by the appellants is in respect of the finding made by the High Court against the appellants on the question of the extension of time for the performance of the contract. The argument is that the learned Judges of the High Court were in error in rejecting the oral evidence led by the appellants. It would, therefore, be necessary to consider the material evidence bearing on this point. The proposal to extend time was made b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther questions put to him in cross-examination, Chinubhai stated that he did not remember whether the appellants accepted the offer or not. It is, however, clear that the evidence of Chinubhai is not at all inconsistent with the statements made by Ratilal and Keshavlal. It is common ground that the prices of the goods were rising at the material time and so it is more likely that the appellants were willing to extend time because they would naturally be keen on obtaining delivery of the goods under the contract. In both the courts below an argument appears to have been urged by reference to the sauda books kept by the respondent. Shri Dharamasi Harilal had brought the sauda books in the court but neither party got the books exhibited in the case. The learned trial judge took the view that, since the sauda books were not produced and proved by the respondent, it led to the inference that, if the books had been produced, they would have shown an endorsement made against the suit contracts that the extension of time had been agreed upon by the appellants. On the other hand, the learned Judges of the High Court were inclined to draw the inference that, since the appellants did not wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s true that the agreement to extend time need not necessarily be reduced to writing. It may be proved by oral evidence. In some cases it may be proved by evidence of conduct. Forbearance on the part of the buyer to make a demand for the delivery of goods on the due date as fixed in the original contract may conceivably be relevant on the question of the intention of the buyer to accept the seller's proposal to extend time. It would be difficult to lay down any hard and fast rule about the requirements of proof of such an agreement. It would naturally be a question of fact in each case to be determined in the light of evidence adduced by the parties. Having regard to the probabilities in this case, and to the conduct of the parties at the relevant time, we think the appellants are entitled to urge that their oral evidence about the acceptance of the respondent's proposal for the extension of time should be believed and the finding of the learned trial judge on this question should be confirmed. 9. The finding in favour of the appellants on this point is not, however, decisive of the dispute between the parties in the present appeal. It still remains to be considered wheth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of grave uncertainty and vagueness in the said proposal. If the normal state of affairs contemplated by the second condition refers to the normal state of affairs in the political situation in the country that would be absolutely and patently uncertain. Even if this normal state of affairs is construed favourably to the appellants and it is assumed that it has reference to the working of the mills, that again does not appreciably help to remove the elements of uncertainty and vagueness. When can normal working of the mills be deemed to recur ? For the normal working of the mills several factors are essential. The full complement of workmen should be present. The requisite raw material should be available and coal in sufficient quantities must be in stock. Some other conditions also may be necessary to make the working of the mills fully normal. Now, unless all the constituent elements of the normal working of the mills are definitely specified and agreed upon, the general expression used in the letter in that behalf cannot be construed as showing anything definite or certain. Therefore, even if the appellants' evidence about the acceptance is believed, that only show in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s all scanning their contracts to find some meaningless clause on which to ride free . In our opinion, this decision can be of no assistance to the appellants' case before us. The second condition in the letter in question constitutes a clause which had to be agreed upon by the parties since it formed one of the conditions of the respondent's proposals for the extension of time. The respondent's proposal was to extend time for the performance of the contract subject to two conditions and unless both the conditions were agreed upon between the parties there would be no valid or binding extension of time under s. 63 of the Indian Contract Act. The fact that the second condition introduced by the respondent is vague and uncertain, does not necessarily show that the said condition was intended by the respondent to be the addition of a meaningless surplusage. If that be the true position, then the material allegations in the plaint itself demonstrably prove that there has been no acceptance by the appellants of the second condition mentioned by the respondent in its proposal to extend time for the performance of the contract. Besides, as we have already indicated, it is real ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. In such a case, the agreement for extension must be held to be vague and uncertain and as such void under s. 29 of the Indian Contract Act. 11. There is one more point which must be considered. It was strongly urged before us by the appellants that, in the trial court, no plea had been taken by the respondent that the agreement for the extension of time was vague and uncertain. No such plea appears to have been taken even in the grounds of appeal preferred by the respondent in the High Court at Bombay; but apparently the plea was allowed to be raised in the High Court and the appellants took no objection to it at that stage. It cannot be said that it was not open to the High Court to allow such a plea to be raised even for the first time in appeal. After all, the plea raised is a plea of law based solely upon the construction of the letter which is the basis of the case for the extension of time for the performance of the contract and so it was competent to the appeal court to allow such a plea to be raised under O. 41, r. 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure. If, on a fair construction, the condition mentioned in the document is held to be vague or uncertain, no evidence can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
