(R.L. Khurana, J.): The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs.68,64,303/- against the three defendants on the following averments.

2. The work of floating of timber in respect of lots No. 1/83-87, 2/83-88 and 1/84-87 was allotted to the defendants vide agreement dated 28.5.1986. In terms of the agreement, the launched timber was to be caught at Bhandarkot near Kishtwar and to be delivered and stacked at the roadside depot of the plaintiffs. The entire work of launching, floating, carriage and stacking etc. was to be completed 31.5.1987.

3. The plaintiffs delivered 90,093 scants equivalent to 8300.095 cubic meters in volume in respect of the three lots to the defendants for the purpose of launching and floating. All these scants were required to be delivered by the defendants at the road side depot at Bhandarkot by 31.5.1987. As per the terms of the agreement permissible loss during the course of floating and carriage was to the extent of 5%. Loss during transit and floating over and above the permissible limit of 5% was to be made good by the defendants at the rate of Rs.2500/-, Rs.2400/- and Rs.2100/- per cubic metre for Deodar, Kail and Fir/Spruce, respectively.

4. The defendants delivered only 59,120 scants equivalent to 5019.247 cubic metres in volume to the plaintiffs as against 90,093 scants equivalent to 8300.095 cubic metres handed over to them for floating. There was) thus, a shortfall to the extent of 30,973 scants equivalent to 3280.848 cubic metres in volume. Such shortfall works out to the extent of 39.52%. After deducting the permissible loss to the extent of 5%, the defendants are liable to make good the loss in respect of 34.52% of the total timber. Such loss, in terms of money has been assessed at Rs.66,48,604 as under:- (i) Costs of 5773 scants equivalent to 538.574cubic metres of Deodar at the rate of Rs.2500/- cubic metre.......13,46,435/-. (ii) Cost of 10,283 scants equivalent to 1383.015 cubic metres of equivalent to 1383.015 cubic metres of Kail at the rate of Rs.2400/- per cubic metre. ......Rs.33,19,236/- (iii)Cost of 10,412 scants of Fir/Spruce equivalent to 944.254 cubic metres at the rate of Rs.2100/- per cubic metre......Rs. 19,82,933/-

5. A sum of Rs.37,768/- is alleged to have been spent by the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendants as under: (a) Lifting charges of timber at the boom-site : Rs.27,460/- (b) Ration charges supplied to the labourers : Rs. 8,858/- (c) Erection and dismantling charges of the boom :Rs. 600/- (d) Payment made to skinman engaged at the boom :Rs. 850/-

6. Another sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- is alleged to have been paid by the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendants to the labourers under an award of the Commissioner, under the workmens Compensation Act. Another sum of Rs.93,605/- is also to be deposited.

7. According to the plaintiffs after adjusting the sum of Rs.35,674/-payable to the defendants under the final bill, a sum of Rs.68,64,303/- is recoverable from the defendants. Hence the present suit. The plaintiffs have also claimed pendent lite and future interest on such amount at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realisation of the amount.

8. The defendants, while resisting the suit admitted that the work in respect of the three lots was allotted to them vide agreement dated 28.5.1985. They, however, denied that 90,093 scants were handed over to them for floating. It was pleaded that the scants from various depots were delivered to them for the purpose of launching and floating without actual counting. They also denied the correctness of the number and volume of the scants alleged to have been received by the plaintiffs. It was also pleaded that the loss of timber, if any, was not on account of negligence in the execution of the work by the defendants but was due to natural calamities. The work was executed and carried out as per the directions of the plaintiffs and under the supervision of the officers of the plaintiff