“ YASHWANTRAO CHAVAN LAW COLLEGE PUNE ”

-: Case law presentation :-

 Name of student :-Mr. ANIL JAYKANT LAMB

(LLM-I , Semi- II ,Roll no.30)

 Name of case:- A.THOMAS VS . A. MANI

Case law presented to :- Prof. SHIVANJLEE PATIL MADAM

Date :- 06/05/2024

1|Page
 (Kerala High Court)

Antony Thomas vs Ayuppunni Mani on 28 October, 1959

Issue :-
1. The defendant in O. S. No. 63 of 1122 of the District Court of Trichur is the
appellant before us. He had undertaken to deliver to the plaintiff 125 candles of
cashew nuts and received Rs. 4,000/- in part payment of the price. The suit was for the
refund of the said sum with interest at 6 per cent per annum.

2. The plaintiff rejected the goods on the ground that the bad nuts exceeded the
stipulated maximum of twenty per cent. The question for consideration is whether the
plaintiff was entitled to reject the goods as he did. The answer depends on whether the
stipulation regarding the bad nuts was a condition or a warranty. That the bad nuts as a
matter of fact exceeded twenty pet cent is not in dispute before us.

Analysis of laws :-
3. Section 12 of the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930, deals with conditions and
warranties as follows :

"1. A stipulation in a contract of sale with reference to goods which are the subject
thereof may be a condition or warranty.
2. A condition is a stipulation essential to the main purpose of the contract, the breach
of which gives rise to a right to treat the contract as repudiated.
3. A warranty is a stipulation collateral to the main purpose of the contract, the breach
of which gives rise to a claim for damages but not to a right to reject the goods and
treat the contract as repudiated.
4. Whether a stipulation in a contract of sale is a condition of a warranty depends in
each case on the construction of the contract. A stipulation may be a condition, though
called a warranty in the contract."

2|Page
COURT Reasoning:-

It is clear that a condition is a more vital undertaking than a warranty, and that the
consequences that flow from its breach are different.

5. The distinction is of great importance. The breach of a condition entitles the

injured party to repudiate the contract, to refuse the goods, and, if he has already
paid for them, to recover the price. The only remedy for the breach of a warranty is
the recovery of damages.

Conclusion :-
The defendant to the plaintiff which embodies the terms of the contract. The
provision therein to the effect that the bad nuts shall not exceed twenty per cent of
the total appears to be a basic element of the description of the goods agreed to be
supplied, and it must follow that the plaintiff's contention has to be upheld.

In the light of what is stated above this appeal has to be dismissed. Judgment
accordingly. The appellant will pay the costs of the respondent.

3|Page
Issue :-

1. The respondent in O. S. No. 63 of 1122 of the Area Court of Trichur is the litigant before us. He had
attempted to convey to the offended party 125 candles of cashew nuts and got Rs. 4,000/ - to some
degree installment of the cost. The suit was for the discount of the expressed total with interest at
6% per annum.

2. The offended party dismissed the merchandise on the ground that the awful nuts surpassed the
specified limit of 20%. The inquiry for thought is whether the offended party was qualified for reject
the merchandise as he did. The response relies upon whether the limitation in regards to the terrible
nuts was a condition or a guarantee. That the terrible nuts in actuality surpassed twenty pet penny
isn't in question before us.

Examination of regulations :-

3. Area 12 of the Indian Offer of Products Act, 1930, manages conditions and guarantees as follows :

"1. An expectation in an agreement of offer concerning products which are the subject thereof might
be a condition or guarantee.

2. A condition is a limitation crucial for the principal motivation behind the agreement, the break of
which leads to one side to regard the agreement as disavowed.

3. A guarantee is an expectation security to the principal reason for the agreement, the break of
which leads to a case for harms yet not to one side to dismiss the products and treat the agreement
as renounced.

4. Whether an expectation in an agreement of offer is a state of a guarantee depends for each

situation on the development of the agreement. An expectation might be a condition, however
called a guarantee in the agreement."

COURT Thinking:-

Obviously a condition is a more imperative endeavor than a guarantee, and that the outcomes that
stream from its break are unique.

5. The qualification is vital. The break of a condition qualifies the harmed party for disavow the
agreement, to deny the products, and, in the event that he has proactively paid for them, to
recuperate the cost. The main solution for the break of a guarantee is the recuperation of harms.

End :-

The litigant to the offended party which epitomizes the particulars of the agreement. The
arrangement in that such that the terrible nuts will not surpass 20% of the complete gives off an
impression of being an essential component of the depiction of the merchandise consented to be
provided, and it should follow that the offended party's conflict must be maintained.

In the radiance of what is expressed over this allure must be excused. Judgment as needs be. The
litigant will pay the expenses of the respondent.

4|Page