3. ‘G’ Contracts with H to buy 50 easy chains of a certain quality. H delivers 25 chairs of the type agreed upon and 25 chairs of some other type, Does ‘G’ reject the chairs?

1. Facts of the Case

• ‘G’ enters into a contract with ‘H’ to purchase 50 easy chairs of a certain agreed quality.
• In fulfillment of the contract, H delivers 25 chairs of the agreed type and 25 chairs of a different type or inferior quality.
• Upon inspection, G notices that half of the goods do not conform to the agreed description or quality.
• The issue arises as to whether G is bound to accept the goods, or whether he can reject the entire delivery because of non-conformity with the contract.

2. Issues in the Case

1. Whether H’s partial non-performance amounts to a breach of contract under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.
2. Whether G has the right to reject the whole consignment or must accept the 25 correct chairs and reject only the defective ones.
3. Whether the delivery of mixed goods (some conforming and some not) constitutes a valid tender of delivery.
4. Applicability of Sections 15, 37, and 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 regarding quality, description, and acceptance of goods.

3. Legal Principles Covered

a) Goods Must Correspond with Description and Quality

• Section 15, Sale of Goods Act, 1930:
  When goods are sold by description, they must correspond with the description.
  • If part of the goods fails to meet the description, it amounts to breach of contract.
  • The buyer has the right to reject the goods if they are not as per contract.

b) Delivery of Wrong Quantity or Mixed Goods

• Section 37, Sale of Goods Act, 1930:
  If the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods less than, greater than, or mixed with goods of a different description, the following rules apply:
  1. Short Delivery:
     If the seller delivers less than the contracted quantity, the buyer may reject the goods or accept them and pay at the contract rate.
  2. Excess Delivery:
     If the seller delivers more than the contracted quantity, the buyer may accept the goods contracted for and reject the rest, or reject the whole.
  3. Mixed Delivery:
     If the seller delivers goods of the contracted description mixed with goods of a different description, the buyer may accept the goods that conform to the contract and reject the rest, or reject the whole consignment.
• Therefore, delivery of 25 correct chairs and 25 incorrect chairs constitutes mixed delivery under Section 37(3).

c) Buyer’s Right of Acceptance or Rejection

• Section 42, Sale of Goods Act, 1930:
  A buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods when:
  1. He intimates to the seller that he has accepted them,
  2. He does any act adopting the transaction, or
  3. He retains the goods beyond a reasonable time without rejecting them.
• If the buyer rejects the goods promptly upon discovering non-conformity, he is within his rights.

d) Case Law Reference

• Varley v. Whipp (1900) 1 QB 513:
  A buyer is not bound to accept goods that do not correspond with the description.
• Arcos Ltd. v. Ronaasen & Son (1933) AC 470:
  Even the slightest deviation from the contractual description allows the buyer to reject the goods entirely.
• Re Moore & Co. and Landauer & Co. (1921) 2 KB 519:
  Delivery not strictly in accordance with contract terms (even in packaging or description) entitles the buyer to reject the goods.

4. Possible Judgement

• The court would likely hold that G has the right to reject the goods because H did not deliver the goods strictly according to the contract.
• The delivery of mixed goods — some conforming and some not — constitutes non-performance under Section 37(3) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.
• G may:
  • Either accept the 25 correct chairs and reject the rest, or
  • Reject the entire delivery since the tender was not according to the contract.
• The buyer (G) is not bound to separate the conforming goods from the non-conforming goods; it is the seller’s duty to deliver goods exactly as per the contract terms.

Final Decision:

The agreement between G and H remains valid, but H’s performance is defective.
Thus, G can lawfully reject the whole consignment and is not obliged to pay for any part of it.
The contract can be rescinded or specific performance may be demanded with proper delivery of 50 chairs of the agreed quality.

About lawgnan:

Learn how delivery of mixed or non-conforming goods impacts buyer and seller rights under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 at Lawgnan.in. Understand key sections like Section 15, 37, and 42, and landmark cases such as Varley v. Whipp and Arcos Ltd. v. Ronaasen & Son, which define the buyer’s right to reject faulty goods. Whether you’re a law student preparing for exams or a practitioner analyzing contractual breaches, Lawgnan provides simplified explanations, case briefs, and expert legal insights. Visit Lawgnan.in today to explore India’s best resource for commercial and contract law learning.