Kapil entered in a contract with Rahul to purchase 1000 litres of mustard oil at the price which should be fixed by Akhilesh. Rahul already delivered 600 litres out of 1000 litres to Kapil but when remaining 400 litres was ready to deliver, Akhilesh denied fixing the price of mustard oil. Rahul asked Kapil to return the oil already delivered and avoid the delivery of 400 litres. Kapil sued Rahul for non-delivery of remaining 400 litres mustard oil. Advise in the light of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.

By virtue of Section 9 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the price in the contract of sale may be fixed by the contract, or agreed to be fixed in a manner provided by the contract, e.g., by a valuer, or determined by the course of dealings between the parties. \nFurther, section 10 provides for the determination of price by a third party in the following manner: \n(a) Where there is an agreement to sell goods on the terms that price has to be fixed by the third party and he either does not or cannot make such valuation, the agreement will be void. \n(b) In case the third party is prevented by the default of either party from fixing the price, the party at fault will be liable to the damages to the other party who is not at fault. \n(c) However, a buyer who has received and appropriated the goods must pay a reasonable price for them in any eventuality.\nIn the instant case, Kapil contracted Rahul to purchase 1000 litres of mustard oil at the price fixed by Akhilesh. After, Rahul delivered 600 litres Akhilesh denied fixing the price of mustard oil. Rahul demanded back the oil already delivered and cancel the delivery of 400 litres. Kapil sued Rahul for non-delivery of remaining 400 litres mustard oil. \nOn the basis of above provisions and facts, Kapil is liable to pay a reasonable price of 600 litres while for remaining 400 litres, contract may be avoided.