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

1988 Supreme(Ker) 274

MALIMATH, SUKUMARAN, BHASKARAN NAMBIAR
ABDUL RAHIMAN – Appellant
Versus
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Two confessed defaulters seek redress under Art.226 of the Constitution in practically identical circumstances in these two writ petitions. For convenience, therefore, it is sufficient to refer to the petitioner and the facts in one writ petition, O. P. No. 3799 of 1981.

2. The Divisional Forest Officer, Palghat, notified on 4th December, 1979 that the right of collection and removal of all timber and firewood except Teak, Rosewood and other enumerated categories of wood, in specified areas will be offered for sale in public auction subject to certain conditions. The auction was held on 26-12-1979 and the petitioner was permitted to bid after he made the earnest money deposit of Rs. 1,000/- and signed a copy of the sale notice in token of having accepted all the conditions. He was the highest bidder with a bid of Rs. 3,31,000/-. He also paid on the sale date Rs. 10,000/- less the earnest money deposit already paid. Within a week thereafter, on 8-1-1980. he, however, informed the first respondent, the Divisional Forest Officer, through a lawyer notice that he was withdrawing his offer, and requesting for refund of the amount paid by him. The first respondent declined h





















































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