The plaintiff must prove malicious prosecution and shortage of timber seized to claim damages and compensation.

K.C Sood, J.—Ram Dass, Plaintiff herein, has filed this suit for the recovery of rupees 15,56,438/- as damages. Plaintiff also claims interest at the rate of 18% per annum with effect from May 5, 1982. The case of the Plaintiff

2. The Plaintiff is a Forest Contractor. He applied for and was given permission to fell 169 Deodar, Kail and Rai (fir) trees from land comprised in Khasra Numbers 23, 35, 37, 43, 48, 51 and 549 from Chak Khagna by a sanction order dated July 13, 1980. These trees were exploited and converted into timber. The timber so converted was brought to the road head and stacked at Khagna Pul in Tehsil Chopal of District Shimla.

3. According to the plaintiff, he stacked 2510 scants of different sizes and species of timber at Khagna Pul. A case for offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against the plaintiff and other persons in terms of F.I.R. No. 12 of 1994. The timber stacked at Khagna Pul was taken into possession by the Enforcement Department in this case and given to the custody of Daulat Ram. The timber so seized was auctioned on the directions of the Court dated March 25, 1986. It is the case of the plaintiff that though 2510 scants were stacked at Khagna Pul but the seizure memo reflect that only 1785 scants of different sizes and species were taken into possession in the aforesaid F.I.R. as the case property. The timber was auctioned on the directions of Special Judge, Shimla on March 25, 1986. The timber so auctioned was 1556 scants. The Department of Forest which took the custody of the timber and the police authorities seized the timber are liable to account for short fall of 954 scants of different sizes and species. The value of the short-fall timber comes to rupees 5,06,100/- according to the prevalent rates in the year 1986-87 for such timber. The plaintiff and other accused were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 167, 218 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 33,41 /42 of the Indian Forest Act. However, they were acquitted for offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 of the Penal Code by the Special Judge, Shimla on December 22, 1989. The plaintiff along with other-accused, filed an appeal against their conviction and was acquitted by the judgment of this Court dated November 25, 1993. While acquitting the accused, the Court ordered, "The State will refund the confiscated amount to Shri Ram Dass within a month". This amount, it may be noticed, was directed to be confiscated by the trial Court.

4. Pursuant to these orders, rupees 3,94,238/-, the sale proceeds of confiscated timber were released to the plaintiff.

5. The plaintiff maintains that he was prosecuted unnecessarily and without there being any case against him. It is the case of the plaintiff that though the timber was auctioned for rupees 4,44,576/- but he was given rupees 3,94,238/- thus rupees 50,338/- were paid less to him and the defendants are liable to pay this amount to the Plaintiff. In all, the plaintiff claims rupees 5,56,438/- from the defendants with 18% interest per annum. Plaintiff also claims rupees 10 lakhs as damages for wrongful/ malicious prosecution. Plaintiff prays for a decree of rupees 15,56,438/ - with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from May 5, 1982.

6. The defendants in their written statements resist the suit. The allegations are controverted. The defendants plead that the case in terms of F.I.R. No. 12 of 1984 was registered against the Plaintiff with the Enforcement Department on a complaint made by Daulat Ram President of Gram Panchayat, Khagna. The complaint was enquired and it was only after inquiry that a regular case was registered against the plaintiff. The investigation showed criminal conspiracy by the plaintiff with other Government servants, accused in the case,