Peach Sale Dispute Results in CNY 4744 Judgment

A court in Central China City has ordered a peach buyer to pay CNY 4744 to a farmer after the buyer failed to settle payment for peaches delivered during the 2011 harvest season. The dispute arose when the farmer, who had responded to a village broadcast calling for peach deliveries, handed over his crop in multiple batches but never received the promised payment. The court found that a valid sales contract had been formed and that the buyer’s refusal to pay constituted a breach.

The plaintiff, Mr. Wang, a farmer from a village in Central China City, brought the case against the defendant, Mr. Zhang, a resident of the same area. According to court records, in 2011, after the peach harvest, Mr. Zhang used a village broadcast system to invite local farmers to deliver their peaches to him. Mr. Wang responded and made several deliveries, each time receiving a handwritten receipt from Mr. Zhang. The total amount due, as indicated by the combined receipts, was CNY 4744. Despite repeated requests for payment, Mr. Zhang did not pay any portion of the amount. The plaintiff sought a court order compelling the defendant to pay the full sum.

At the hearing, the defendant, Mr. Zhang, did not appear in court after being properly notified, and he filed no defense or evidence. The plaintiff presented ten receipts signed by the defendant, each documenting a specific peach delivery, and a certificate from the village committee confirming that the defendant had indeed used the village broadcast to solicit peach deliveries during the relevant season. The court reviewed these materials and determined that the receipts and the committee certificate corroborated each other, providing consistent and credible support for the plaintiff’s claims.

The court held that the evidence established a clear factual basis for the dispute. It found that when Mr. Wang delivered his peaches to Mr. Zhang and Mr. Zhang issued receipts, a purchase and sale contract was formed. Under the law, the defendant was obligated to pay for the goods received. The court noted that the defendant had not provided any justification for the non-payment and that the plaintiff’s demand for repayment was legally sound. Accordingly, the court ordered Mr. Zhang to pay Mr. Wang the sum of CNY 4744 within three days of the judgment taking effect. The defendant was also required to bear the court filing fee of CNY 25, and if he failed to pay on time, he would have to pay double interest on the overdue amount.

According to relevant law, specifically Articles 6, 8, 60, and 159 of the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China, parties to a contract must act in good faith and perform their obligations. The court reasoned that Mr. Wang had fulfilled his duty by delivering the peaches, and Mr. Zhang’s failure to pay violated the contract. The legal analysis emphasized that even informal transactions, such as those evidenced only by handwritten receipts, create binding obligations. The court also referenced the principle of enforcing lawful debts to maintain fairness in commercial dealings.

This case underscores the importance of documenting agricultural sales transactions, even in small-scale village settings. The receipts served as crucial evidence, enabling the farmer to prove the amount owed despite the buyer’s absence from court. The judgment reaffirms that buyers who solicit goods through public announcements cannot avoid payment by ignoring demands or failing to appear in court. For farmers and small traders, keeping written records of deliveries and payments remains a practical safeguard