1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

R.S.A. No.1484/2015 (MON)

BETWEEN:

ITC LIMITED

18 BANASWADI MAIN ROAD

MARUTHISEVA NAGAR

BENGALURU 3 560005

FORMERLY, THE WESTERN INDIAN

MATCH COMPANY LTD. (WIMCO),

REPRESENTED BY ITS

FINANCE MANAGER

MR. VINAY BAHETY

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

... APPELLANT

(BY SRI B.G. GAURAV MANDAPPA, ADVOCATE

A/W SRI. RAYAPPA Y HADAGALI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU 3 560 001.

2.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF

CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU-560 001.

3.

THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE

SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.

2

4.

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,

SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE,

SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. H.R. ANITHA, HCGP FOR RESPONDENTS)

THIS R.S.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC.,

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.03.2015

PASSED IN R.A.NO.283/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE

PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, SHIVAMOGGA,

DISMISSING

THE

APPEAL

AND

CONFIRMING

THE

JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.07.10 PASSED IN

O.S.NO.88/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENIOR

CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., SHIVAMOGGA.

THIS R.S.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSIONS THIS DAY,

THE COURT, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

This Regular Second Appeal is filed by the

defendants challenging the judgment and decree dated

28.03.2015 passed in R.A.No.283/2010 on the file of the

Fast Track Court, Shivamogga confirming the judgment

and decree dated 20.07.2010 passed in O.S.No.88/2001

on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge,

Shivamogga, decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this

appeal shall be referred to in terms of their status and

ranking before the trial Court.

3

3. The plaintiffs are the State of Karnataka and

others. The defendants had entered into an agreement

dated 09.02.1965 for extraction and removal of certain

timbers for manufacture of matchsticks of the species

detailed and listed in the schedule annexed to the

agreement at the concessional rates by the District

Forest. The defendants have also entered into several

supplemental agreements modifying the terms and

conditions of extraction and removal of the quantum of

supply and with regard to the rates specified insofar as

species. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the consumers

of timber at concessional rates had to pay seigniorage

rates in force prior to 19.02.1981 and in this regard, the

Committee was appointed by the Government to fix the

seigniorage

rates

with

retrospective

effect

from

23.02.1981 and accordingly, the defendants are liable to

pay the difference in seigniorage rates in respect of the

timber extracted and removed by them from the forest of

Shivamogga

Division

between

23.02.1981

and

28.06.1982. Accordingly, it is the case of the plaintiffs

that the defendants are liable to pay Rs.2,55,750/- as on

4

28.02.2001 with interest. It is the case of the plaintiffs

that though they made repeated requests to the

defendants, the same was not considered by the

defendants and as such, the plaintiffs have filed

O.S.No.88/2001 before the trial Court for recovery of

money of Rs.2,55,750/- with current and future interest

at the rate of 18% p.a. from the defendants.

4. Defendants entered appearance and filed

detailed written statement denying the averments made

in the plaint. It is the case of defendants that after

adjusting, the amount has already been paid by them

and there is no outstanding. Defendants have also

contended that the plaintiffs are seeking interest at

higher rate, which cannot be accepted.

5. The trial Court based on the pleadings on

record,

formulated

the

following

issues

for

its

consideration;

1) Whether the plaintiffs prove that an

agreement

was entered into

with the