Contemporaneous admissions and delivery documents can defeat short-delivery claims and support contractual interest in commercial sales.

Contemporaneous contractual documents and admissions showing delivery and acceptance of goods can defeat a plea of short delivery and deny leave to defend where no genuine triable issue survives. On the facts described, the buyer had contracted for cash-on-delivery supply, the seller produced the required documents, and the buyer's own conduct confirmed ownership and receipt; payment therefore became due on delivery. In a commercial transaction where the seller is kept out of its money for a substantial period, an interest award of 18% per annum was not treated as excessive or unjustified.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the defendant was entitled to leave to defend on the plea that only a lesser quantity of goods had been received and that property in the goods had not passed by 9 June 1995; (ii) Whether the award of interest at 18% per annum called for interference.

Issue (i): Whether the defendant was entitled to leave to defend on the plea that only a lesser quantity of goods had been received and that property in the goods had not passed by 9 June 1995.

Analysis: The contractual documents and contemporaneous correspondence showed that the parties contracted for 14,250 MT on cash on delivery terms, with delivery at JNPT, Bombay. The seller furnished the stipulated documents, including the survey and weight certificates, and the buyer itself confirmed purchase of 14,250 MT to the customs authorities. The buyer also issued dispatch instructions to its clearing agent and dealt with the cargo as owner. On these admitted documents, the plea of short delivery was treated as an afterthought and no triable defence survived.

Conclusion: The defendant was not entitled to leave to defend, and the finding that property in the goods had passed to the buyer by 9 June 1995 was upheld in favour of the respondent.

Issue (ii): Whether the award of interest at 18% per annum called for interference.

Analysis: The transaction was commercial in nature, the price had become payable on delivery, and the seller had been kept out of its money for a substantial period. In these circumstances, the rate of interest fixed by the court below was not considered excessive or unjustified.

Conclusion: The award of interest at 18% per annum was sustained in favour of the respondent.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on all substantive grounds and the decree in favour of the plaintiff was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where contemporaneous admissions and contractual documents establish delivery and acceptance of goods, a plea of short delivery unsupported by a genuine triable issue cannot justify leave to defend, and payment becomes due on delivery in accordance with the contract.

---