http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10
PETITIONER: CENTRAL NATIONAL BANK LTD.
Vs.
RESPONDENT: UNITED INDUSTRIAL BANK LTD.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/11/1953
BENCH: MUKHERJEA, B.K. BENCH: MUKHERJEA, B.K. BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. JAGANNADHADAS, B.
CITATION: 1954 AIR 181 1954 SCR 391
ACT: Indian Sale of Goods Act (III of 1930), s. 30(2)-Indian Contract Act (IX of 1872), ss. 13, 14--Agreement to sell goods-Buyer obtaining possession by fraud aithout paying price-Rights of bona fide purchaser from buyer-"Consent" meaning of.
HEADNOTE: The word "consent" in s. 30(2) of the Indian Sale of Goods Act means "agreeing on the same thing in the same sense" as defined in s. 13 of the Indian Contract Act and does not mean "free consent" as defined in s. 14. Therefore, possession of goods which is obtained by a person from another person who has agreed to sell them to him, would be possession obtained "with the consent of the seller" within the meaning of s. 30(2) of the Sale of Goods Act, even though it was obtained by fraud, except where the fraud committed is of such a character as would prevent there being consent at all. The fact that the fraud or deception practised by the person obtaining possession is of such a character as to make him guilty of a criminal offence would not make any difference in the application of this principle. A agreed to sell certain shares to B...