SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 819

S.S.M.QUADRI, SHIVARAJ V.PATIL
State Of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
T. M. Chacko – Respondent


ORDER

The short question that arises in this appeal is whether Exhibits B-4 and A-8 do not contain any acknowledgement of the liability by the Appellant - Defendant, the State of Kerala, and if so is the suit filed by the Respondent - Plaintiff, for recovery of the bid amount paid to the Forest Department, barred by limitation under Article 47 of the Limitation Act, 1963?

2. Briefly stated, the following facts give rise to this question.

3. The Forest Department of the State of Kerala auctioned the forest produce in different coupes. The Respondent was the highest bidder of Sub-coupe No. VII of Coupe X and his bid of Rupees seventy five thousand was accepted on January 15, 1974. The Respondent paid Rs. 60,125/- towards the bid amount and other charges and a sum of Rupees twenty five thousand remained unpaid. The Respondent was to collect and remove the whole forest produce of the said coupe on or before March 31, 1974. Part of it only was collected and removed by him before February 21, 1974, when unfortunately fire broke out in the reserved forest which destroyed also the remaining forest produce of the Respondent s coupe. The Respondent made representations to the Forest Department















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top