Case: Hoe Kim Seing Vs Maung Ba Chit. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Judges | Atkin, John Wallis and Shadi Lal, JJ. |
| Issue | Indian Sale of Goods Act (III of 1930) - Sections 19, 22 |
| Citation | 1935 (37) BomLR 866 |
| Judgement Date | July 11, 1935 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
Shadi Lal, J.
-
This appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Rangoon raises the question whether the property in certain paddy belonging to one Maung Po Ni had passed to the appellant, Hoe Kim Seing, before the date on which the estate of the former vested in the Official Receiver who was appointed by the Court adjudging him an insolvent.
-
The circumstances, which have led to the dispute, may be briefly stated. Maung Po Ni (hereinafter called Po Ni) was a cultivator of paddy in Burma and also dealt in the purchase and sale of that commodity. He made his purchases with borrowed capital, and in 1930 he was indebted to several persons, including the appellant, who was a merchant doing business on a large scale in the purchase of paddy. He had advanced about two lakhs of rupees to Po Ni for the purchase of paddy, which was to be delivered by the debtor to the creditor in satisfaction of the debt.
-
It appears that Po Ni was unable to discharge his liabilities, and, accordingly, on July 22, 1930, he presented to the Court of the District Judge at Pegu a petition to be adjudged an insolvent. On August 16, 1930, the Court made an order of adjudication, and appointed the respondent Maung Ba Chit to be the Receiver of the insolvent's estate. This order took effect from July 22, 1930, the date of the presentation of the petition; and it is clear that the whole of the property, which belonged to the insolvent at that date, vested in the Official Receiver.
-
Now, it may be stated at;he outset, that this appeal is not concerned with the insolvent's paddy which was stored at Nyaunglebin in the Pegu District, and that the dispute between the parties is now confined to the paddy which was stored at another place called Peinzalok situated in the same District. That paddy consisted of 28,000 baskets, and it is common ground that 21,000 baskets thereof were stored in a granary having three compartments, each containing 7,000 baskets, and that the remaining 7,000 baskets were stored in another godown. The paddy stored in the granary of three compartments was originally the property of one Po Thin, who, on April 24, 1930, entered into a contract with Po Ni for its sale. On that date the seller executed in favour of the buyer a document called " Sold Note," and the latter executed a corresponding document called " Bought Note." These notes recorded the sale of the paddy to Po Ni at the price of Rs. 160 for 100 baskets, and the receipt by the seller of Rs. 2,100 as earnest money. The parties are agreed that the seller subsequently got, in part...
To continue reading
Request your trial