The Court delivered the following the defaulting bidder will not be permitted to bid at the resale. Condition 30 relating to the confirmation of the sale is important. The sale is subject to confirmation by the District Forest Officer or the Conservator of Forests, Coimbatore Circle as the case may be, who reserve to themselves the right to accept or reject the bid without assigning any reasons therefor. Under condition 32, all the money due by the successful bidder or contractor, as the case may be, under the terms of the sale notice or the agreement executed by him shall, ‘if not paid by him be recoverable from him under section 66 of the Madras Forest Act (V of 1882) as amended by Forest Act (I of 1934) by the attachment and sale of his property under Madras Act II of 1864 and any statutory modification thereof.

Admittedly, the auction sale in this case was held by the District Forest Officer the 2nd defendant in the case. On the 19th of January, 1959, before the receipt of any order from the District Forest Officer confirming the sale of the leasehold right the plaintiff, complaining that he had received no information in the matter and that the cultivation season had also passed, withdrew his bids and asked for the refund of the earnest deposit of Rs. 400. There was no response to this letter of the plaintiff withdrawing his bid, and without reference to the same, by proceedings dated 30th January, 1959 and 31st January, 1959, the District Forest Officer proceeded to confirm the plaintiff’s bids and called upon him to execute agreements in the prescribed form. There is a separate confirmation order for each one of the four plots. Each order refers to the bid amount and requires the plaintiff to pay the balance due less the earnest deposit within 10 days of the receipt of the order in accordance with the conditions of the sale. The plaintiff refused to comply with the demands and the District Forest Officer proceeded to re-sell by public auction the leasehold right with regard to the four plots. By his letter, dated 3rd September 1959, he intimated the plaintiff that the plots have been re-auctioned and that the plaintiff should pay a sum of Rs. 4,025, the loss sustained by the Government as a result of the re-sale, giving credit for the earnest deposit of Rs. 400. He initiated proceedings to recover the aforesaid amount under the Revenue Recovery Act through the Collector of Nilgiris. The plaintiff, thereupon, issued the necessary notice under section 80, Civil Procedure Code, and commenced action for a declaration that the proceedings of the State of Madras represented by the District Forest Officer, Coimbatore, and the coercive action initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act are illegal and unsustainable in law and for refund of the earnest money deposit of Rs. 400. The plaintiff took the stand that there was no completed contract in the case, and that, before due acceptance of his highest bid by confirmation in accordance with the conditions of the sale, he had withdrawn his bid The learned Subordinate Judge, Nilgiris, upheld the plaintiff’s contention that there was no concluded contract and granted him the declaration as prayed for and decree for the refund of the earnest deposit. On appeal, the learned District Judge Coimbatore, took the view that there was a definite acceptance of the plaintiffs’ bid at the auction and the sale was confirmed by the authority concerned On that view, he reversed the decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit.

The argument of Mr. A.K. Sreeraman is to the following effect. There was no immediate acceptance by the District Forest Officer of the plaintiff’s highest bid at the auction. Under the conditions of the auction sale the District Forest Officer or the Conservator of Forests, as the case may be, reserved to themselves the right to accept or reject the bid without assigning any reason and the sale is subject to confirmation. It was not signified in any manner at the time of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document