<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1977 (11) TMI 138 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174551</link>
    <description>Pucca delivery orders subject to registration with the mills, execution of undertakings, and the mills&#039; reservation of a right to refuse recognition of transferees were held not to satisfy the contractual requirement for delivery orders giving an unconditional right to receive goods. The majority treated such restrictive documents as not qualifying as documents of title in the relevant commercial setting, so they could not support enforcement of delivery. The alleged Calcutta jute trade custom was also found unproved for want of uniformity and certainty, and in any event could not override express contractual terms or the governing statutory framework. Correspondence and conduct did not cure the defective tender. The ratio stated that usage cannot displace clear contractual and statutory requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:43:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (11) TMI 138 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174551</link>
      <description>Pucca delivery orders subject to registration with the mills, execution of undertakings, and the mills&#039; reservation of a right to refuse recognition of transferees were held not to satisfy the contractual requirement for delivery orders giving an unconditional right to receive goods. The majority treated such restrictive documents as not qualifying as documents of title in the relevant commercial setting, so they could not support enforcement of delivery. The alleged Calcutta jute trade custom was also found unproved for want of uniformity and certainty, and in any event could not override express contractual terms or the governing statutory framework. Correspondence and conduct did not cure the defective tender. The ratio stated that usage cannot displace clear contractual and statutory requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174551</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>