Case in Brief:

Ananda contracted a sell 2000 units to B.On 1 st april 2012 a delivered 1000 units
and the rest 1000 units were delivered on 20.4.2012.When it is found substantial
portion is badly damaged due to bad packaging and some are not finished goods
rendered on sellable. The entire consignment was rejected and returned.The buyer
suffer a huge loss.
The buyer filed a suit for price as well for the damages against the seller.
From the pleadings the following issues may be curved out:
1.Whether complete rejection is justified ?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get back the price ?
3.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any damages ?

It is a contract for sale of 2000 units,out of which on 1 st april 2012, the 1st lot of
1000 units were delivered and 20 days thereafter the rest was delivered.The buyer
receiving 1st lot of delivery retained the goods delivered and thereafter the
remaining 1000 units are delivered after a lapse of 20 days.Since goods are
delivered,the ownership has transferred to the buyer.Where a contract of sale is not
severable and the buyer has accepted the goods or part there of, or where the
contract is for specific goods,the property in which has passed to buyer,the breach
of any condition to be fulfilled by the seller can only be created as a breach of
warranty and not as a ground for rejecting the goods and treating the contract as a
repudiated.
According to section42 of the sales of goods Act., the goods are said to have been
accepted on delivry of goods.In the cases mentioned below.
1
2..
3.When after the lapse of a reasonable time,the buyer retains the goofds without
any intimation of defects to the seller.
In the case in hand the goods of 1000 units were delivered on 1 st april 2012 and the
buyer retained the same for about 20 days without intimation the defects of the
goods received.When the remaining 1000 units are delivered the buyer cannot
reject the goods of the whole consignment and cannot also treat the contract as
repudiated.

Plz refer to Section 16 of sale of goods Act.

Doctrine of Caveat emptor means let the buyer be aware .Whenever a buyer buys
a goods he must exercise necessary care in his own interest.A buyer,in a contract of
sale of specific goods,purchases the goods at his own risk as regards the quality
price of thr goods except in the case of fraud or where any condition to that effect
is laid down in the contract.A buyer cannot hold the seller responsible and liable if
the goods turn out to be defective or do not prove to be useful for the purpose for
which they are purchased or if the buyer makes any mistakes in assessing the
quality of goods purchased.Thus it is for the buyer to ensure himself only at the
time of purchase that the goods confirm his own requirements.In one case A sold
some pigs to the market to be sold by auction.B purchased all the pigs with all faults
and errors of description.A knew that his pigs are suffering from some fever but he
didnt disclose the same to B.It was held in the case that there was no implied
warranty by A and the sale was good and A was not liable to any damages.[Ward vs
Hobbs]
The caveat emptor is no longer a good law in India.

In the view of the above discussion the rejection of whole consignment is not
justified and the person who sustain loss due to rejection can sue for the price and
damages also(this is one way of argument).Accordingly all the issues are answered.