Seller Delivery Shortfall and Burden of Proof in Contract Rescission

In a dispute concerning a contract for the sale of goods, the buyer alleged that the seller failed to deliver the quantity stipulated in the agreement, leading to a claim for rescission and damages; the appellate court upheld the trial court's decision based on insufficient evidence presented by the buyer to definitively prove the shortfall as stipulated by the contract terms. The Supreme Court quashed the appellate decision, reasoning that the appellate court had incorrectly placed the entire burden of proof on the buyer to establish the exact shortfall, instead of requiring the seller, who admitted to a partial delivery, to demonstrate the delivery of the complete contracted quantity or justify the deficit, thereby misapplying the general principles governing contractual execution and the burden of proof related to contractual obligations.