Peach Purchase Dispute Results in CNY 483 Judgment Against Buyer

A court in Eastern China City ruled in favor of two peach farmers who sued a local buyer for failing to pay for fruit delivered during the 2011 harvest season. The married couple sought recovery of 483 CNY in unpaid proceeds from the sale of fresh peaches. The defendant did not appear in court or submit any defense. The court ordered the buyer to pay the outstanding amount plus costs.

The plaintiffs, Mr. Liu and Ms. Wang, are a married couple who grow peaches. During the 2011 peach harvest, the defendant, Mr. Zhang, announced over the village broadcast system that farmers should bring their peaches to him for purchase. Mr. Liu and Ms. Wang delivered their peaches in two separate batches. Each time, Mr. Zhang issued handwritten receipts confirming the quantity and value. The total owed for both deliveries was 483 CNY. Despite repeated requests, Mr. Zhang never paid.

During the court hearing, the plaintiffs presented two receipts signed by the defendant. They also submitted a certificate from the village committee confirming that Mr. Zhang had used the public broadcast to call for peach deliveries. A second village certificate verified that Mr. Liu and Ms. Wang are the same individuals who delivered the peaches and that they are legally married. The defendant was properly summoned but did not attend. The court examined all evidence and found it consistent and credible.

The court determined that the receipts and supporting documents sufficiently proved the existence of a sale contract between the parties. The evidence showed that Mr. Zhang accepted the peaches and issued written acknowledgments of the amounts due. The court therefore accepted the plaintiffs’ version of events as fact. The defendant failed to appear or present any counter-evidence, leaving the plaintiffs’ claims unchallenged.

Under relevant contract law, a sale contract is formed when goods are delivered and accepted. The court held that Mr. Zhang’s issuance of receipts created a binding obligation to pay. His failure to remit payment for over a year constituted a breach of contract. The law requires that parties perform their obligations in good faith. Because Mr. Zhang neither paid nor offered any justification, the court found him liable for the full amount. The court also awarded court costs against the defendant.

This case is a straightforward example of a small agricultural sale dispute resolved through basic contract principles. Farmers who sell perishable goods such as fruit should ensure they obtain written receipts or records of delivery. The decision reinforces that oral or broadcast invitations to sell, followed by written receipts, create enforceable obligations. Buyers who fail to pay may face legal action and additional costs for delay. The judgment also highlights that courts will proceed even when a defendant does not respond, as long as proper notice has been given.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.