Time : 3 Hours] [Max. Marks : 70
Instructions to the candidates: 1) Answer any Two cases.
2) All questions carry equal marks.
Q1) Case - 1
HANSA TRACTOMOTIVE LTD.
The Hansa Tractomotive Limited at Delhi contracted with Kay Jee Hydraulics Ltd. Bombay for the supply of two filtering and transfer machines. The following terms and conditions were agreed upon between the representives :
Price per unit = Rs.12,500 F.O.R. Bombay
Delivery = 10-12 weeks after receipt of buyers confirmed order.
Payment = 60 days after despatch of material under the New Bill Marketing scheme.
Accordingly, Hansa raised a purchase order and sent two copies of the same to Kay Jee which the latter acknowledged without any change.
The machines were completed by Kay Jee within the stipulated delivery period and sent to Hansa but instead of shipping via Rail, Hansas designated carrier, Kay Jee despatched the consignment by Express Roadlines by truck. As per terms of contract, the hundi was raised for the invoiced amount by Kay Jee which was signed/accepted by Hansa.
En-route to Delhi, the truck collided with an incoming tractor trailer and rolled over an embankment resulting in total loss of the consignment.
When Malhotra, the buyer with Hansa contacted Naik, the sales manager with Kay Jee regarding the loss-in-transit, the former was told by the later, the machines were sold F.O.R. Bombay and the title passed to Hansa at that time. The responsibility of filing claim with the carrier, therefore, is certainly not ours (Kay Jees).
But you did not route the consignment by the carrier designated by us argued Malhotra.
Our intention was to save Hansa freight cost and provide delivery by the faster mode of transport Justified Naik.
And you had no approval from us stressed Malhotra.
The very fact explained Naik, that you (Hansa) signed the Hundi and accepted the lorry receipt from our representative implies that you accepted the change.
Signing the hundi does not mean we altered the terms of delivery. Terms of payment and terms of delivery are two separate issues pleaded Malhotra. Yes, interrupting said Naik, but they are related...
(The discussion went on each side trying to justifying their action without any ultimate result).
a) How do you react to the situation cited above?
b) Whose responsibility is to file claim with the carrier?
c) What are the merits and demerits of the F.O.R. (place of despatch) and F.O.R. (destination) point?
Q2) Case - 2
DECKOR INDIA LIMITED
Here is a list of our suppliers sir. said Marwha while pushing the source register infornt of Mr.R.P.Singh, the newly joined purchase executive. Mr.Marwha, the purchase officer had been looking after the purchase for quite some time as the post of purchase manager had not been filled. The reasons for this were not known in the department.
Singh went through the names and instructed Marwha to call the suppliers one by one so that he could talk to them. He gave Marwha a week to arrange meetings @ 3 to 4 suppliers a day.
Some of these you can meet just now, sir! said Marwha. Just now!
Yes, Sir! The owners/proprietors/partners of many firms are also our own employees. I have only to run around the shops and offices and get them here.
Are you serious?
Very much sir. Here are few examples : Out requirements of auto-parts are being met by the supervisor working in our autoshop. A union leader owns workship and does the subcontract work for us . Stationery is being supplied by our head clerk. An accountant owns two four wheelers which are regularly retained by the company to collect and deliver materials from/to suppliers plants and transporters godowns. Gaskets and plastic caps are being supplied by an employee in the grinding section. A purchase assistant has put up a plating shop in the name of his brother and invariably jobs are routed to him for surface treatment. Same way a number of other examples can be given. Should I call some of them now?
scientific purchasing?
But this has been buying policy all along argued Marwha.
Please leave this register here Mr.Marwha said Singh, and I shall let you know what is to be done!
(Marwha leaves)
Singh studied the register in details and wrote a long confidential memo to the Managing Director.
a) Do you, like the purchase executive, subscribe to the views that employees should not be the suppliers of the company?
b) Draft a memo to M.D. against the current policy?
c) How can the existing policy be reversed without causing bitterness? Q3) Case - 3
ARCTIC INDIA LIMITED
Mr.Mullick, is a material manager with Arctic India Limited, a medium sized engineering firm engaged in the manufacture of domestic appliances. Over the last few years, Mr.Mullick has developed very intimate relations with his suppliers. On the day of marriage of his sister, one of his suppliers presented to him a costly gift, a VCR. The policy regarding the gifts in the policy manual of the company reads, Gifts beyond Rs.200 should not be
accepted. His plea with the supplier that cant accept the gift makes the
supplier snub him Is Malti only your sister. She is my sister as well. And I am giving this gift to my sister. Mr.Mullick is confused. If he does not accept the gift, the supplier will create a scene. And if he accepts, there is of course going to be the problem.
a) Analyse the situation and suggest the best course of action for Mr.Mullick to follow.
b) Is the policy on gifts properly framed?
c) What course of action on the part of Mr.Mullick would have prevented this?
xxxx
Total No. of Questions : 6] [Total No. of Pages : 1