Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.S.Bachawat : S.M.Sikri
Badri Prasad
Versus
State Of M.P.
Case No. : 18 of 1966
Date of Decision : 10/11/68
Advocates Appeared: Sanghi G.L. : Shroff I.N.
Sale of Goods Act – Section 19 – Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates,. Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950 – Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 – Trees vested under state – Specific performance of contract – Appeal by special leave is directed against judgment and decree of Madhya Pradesh High court allowing appeal of State of Madhya Pradesh ana dismissing suit brought by appellant – Three points have been raised before court that forest and trees did not vest in State under Act – That even if they vested, standing timber having been sold to plaintiff did not vest in State under Act – That a new contract was completed, and plaintiff was entitled to specific performance of contract – Held, It is too late in day to contend that forest and trees did not vest in Stata under Act – There is no force in contention of counsel that under contract plaintiff bad become owner of trees as goods – It is true that trees which are agreed to be severed before sale or under contract of sale are "goods" for purposes of Sale of Goods Act. – But before they cease to be "proprietary" right or interest in proprietary rights within meaning of Sections 3 and 4 (a) of Act they must be felled under contract. – It will be noticed that under Clause I of contract the plaintiff was entitled to cut teak trees of more than 12 inches girth. – It had to be ascertained which trees fell within that description. – Till this was ascertained, they were not "ascertained goods" within Section 19 of Sale of Goods Act. – Clause 5 of contract contemplated that stumps of trees, after cutting had to be 3 inches high. – Contract was not to sell whole of trees. – In these circumstances property in cut timber would only pass to plaintiff under contract at earliest when trees are felled. – But before that happened trees bad vested in State. – Whether a new contract was concluded between government and plaintiff. – It is extremely doubtful whether letter datis an offer. – It seems to be an invitation to plaintiff to make offer. – Be that as it may even if it is treated as an offer there was no unconditional acceptance by letter – Plaintiff expressly reserved his right to claim a refund of Rs. 17,000.00. – According to letter of Divisional Forest Officer, plaintiff had to give up his claim to Rs. 17,000.00 which he had already paid and had to pay a further sum of Rupees 17,000.00. – High court rightly held that alleged acceptance of offer made was conditional and qualified – Appeal Dismissed
S.M.SIKRI, J.
(1) THIS appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and decree of the Madhya Pradesh High court allowing the appeal of the State of Madhya Pradesh ana dismissing the suit brought by the appellant, Badri Prasad - hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff.
(2) THE relevant facts for determining the points raised before us are these. On 27/12/1950, a contract was entered into between Kumar Bharat, Shah, minor, through his guardian, and the plaintiff, in respect of forests in Mouza Sunderpani Jagir. The terms were reduced to writing and an agreement was signed on 21/01/1951. It is necessary to reproduce the agreement in extenso as it would be necessary to interpret it carefully.
"DEED of agreement executed by Shri Kumar Bharat Shah minor, guardian Shrimati Rani Umarkuar Sahiba, Jagirdar of Mouza Sunderpani.
CONDITIONS of contract, area, forest, Mouza Sunderpani.
(1) Out of the area of 1704.46 acres of Mouza Sunderpani Jagir contract of all the teak trees of more than 12 inches girth standing in the 1000 acres of the forest of big trees and excluding those teak trees wnich have girth upto 12 inches is given to contractor Badri Prasad Moolchand firm of Timarni for a sum of Rs. 17,000.00 seventeen thousand rupees on payment of the amount in a lump sum.
2 In respect of the teak trees mentioned in paragraph No. 1 contractor Shri Badri Prasad deposited with me the total amount of Rs. 17,000.00 seventeen thousand rupees, as under:-
RS. 6,000.00, six thousand rupees on 27-12-50.
RS. 11,000.00 eleven thousand rupees on 21-1-51.
RECEIPTS have been passed for depositing the above amount.
(3) The transfer of the forest shall not be done without consent of the owner. The contractor shall have to pay Rs. 100.00, one hundred rupees, for transfer.
(4) For the proper execution of work of the forest the felling of the forest shall have to be done from one side. Excluding the teak trees upto the girth of 12 inches the cutting or those teak trees which are above that girth shall have to be serially done.
(5) After felling, the stumps of teak trees should be 3 inches high from the ground and slanting so as to drain the water off. It shall be necessary to prepare the stumps within a week. Till the stumps are passed the wood cannot be removed. Only the pairing can be done. The coupe guard shall make a hammer mark of passing on the stump and end of the paired wood.
(6) The contractor shall have to get the transit of goods done by the coupe guard. The contractor shall have to do the transit of goods through the licence book and submit the monthly accounts. Without licence no goods shall be transported out of the forest.
(7) The contractor shall have to take care of the teak trees of 12 inches girth standing in the forest. If damage is caused proper penalty shall be charged.
(8) The contractor can appoint an agent with permission.
(9) The contractor shall have to deposit Rs. 100.00, one hundred rupees for properly preparing the stumps of the teak trees of the forest before starting the work. This amount shall be returned on completion of the work if the stumps are properly prepared otherwise the expenses which may be incurred shall be deducted.
(10) The contractor shall be responsible for any damage caused to the forest by the contractor or his agent and be shall have to pay the penalty.
(11) The period of the contract shall be 3 years, i.e., from 27-12-50 to 27/12/1953.
HENCE the agreement in execution and the same is genuine. The contractor and the owner of the forest shall be bound by this."
On 22/01/1951, the Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates,. Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950 (Madhya Pradesh Act 1 of 1951) hereinafter referred to as the Act received the assent of the President and was published in the Gazette on 26/01/1951. The plaintiff started working under the contract in March, 1951. On March 31/03/1951, a notification was issued vesting the esta
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
