https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305097 The case involved a dispute over a contract for the supply of tin, with the buyers alleging that the sellers wrongfully repudiated the contract. The sellers argued that performance was contingent upon the arrival of tin from Penang, which became impossible due to the Japanese occupation. The trial judge found the contract impossible to perform, but the appellate court disagreed, holding that delivery was not contingent upon tin from Penang. The sellers were found to have breached the contract, and the Privy Council upheld the decision, dismissing the appeal and ordering the sellers to pay the buyers' costs. en-us Tue, 08 Jun 1948 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:40:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305097 The case involved a dispute over a contract for the supply of tin, with the buyers alleging that the sellers wrongfully repudiated the contract. The sellers argued that performance was contingent upon the arrival of tin from Penang, which became impossible due to the Japanese occupation. The trial judge found the contract impossible to perform, but the appellate court disagreed, holding that delivery was not contingent upon tin from Penang. The sellers were found to have breached the contract, and the Privy Council upheld the decision, dismissing the appeal and ordering the sellers to pay the buyers' costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Jun 1948 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305097