In order to invoke Section 70 of the Contract Act, the plaintiff must establish that (1) the plaintiff had lawfully done something for the State or delivered something to it; (2) that the plaintiff did not intend to act gratuitously; and (3) that the State enjoyed the benefit of the plaintiff's act.

Headnote:
CONTRACT - Section 70 - Interpretation - Covenant between Union of India and erstwhile Ruler of Alwar State - Property used for educational purposes - No provision for compensation or rent - Whether plaintiff entitled to compensation.
Fact of the Case:

Plaintiff, successor-in-title to the erstwhile Ruler of Alwar State, filed a suit against the State of Rajasthan for compensation for the use and occupation of a property used for educational purposes. The property was subject to a covenant between the Union of India and the erstwhile Ruler, which stated that the property would remain in the possession and use of the State so long as it was required for educational purposes. The covenant did not provide for compensation or rent.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to compensation. It found that the covenant was entered into gratuitously and that the State was not liable to pay any rent or compensation. The court also found that the plaintiff had failed to produce any evidence to show that the intention of the parties was otherwise.
Issues: 1. Whether the covenant between the Union of India and the erstwhile Ruler of Alwar State was entered into gratuitously? 2. Whether the State was liable to pay compensation or rent for the use and occupation of the property?
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 70 of the Contract Act and held that the plaintiff had failed to establish the three conditions necessary to invoke the provision: (1) that the plaintiff had lawfully done something for the State or delivered something to it; (2) that the plaintiff did not intend to act gratuitously; and (3) that the State enjoyed the benefit of the plaintiff's act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal.

JUDGMENT

1. - This appeal was also listed before this Court yesterday i.e. on 9th April, 1985, for final hearing. Mr. Ajit Bhandari, a panel lawyer, appeared before this court and submitted that he is not prepared to argue the case as the file of the case has been handed over to him only in the morning. Hearing was adjourned. Today, Mr. K.N. Garg, appearing on behalf of the State, looking to the nature of the case, rushed and approached Mr. M.I. Khan, Government Advocate, to give him assistance. Mr. M.I. Khan, who is an eminent lawyer, assisted the Court in the right earnestness. He rushed to the Court after the completion of the arguments of Mr. Lodha, counsel for the appellant. Generally, there is a dearth of good lawyers in the Government Advocate office and the Courts are not getting proper assistance, Mr. M.I. Khan, submitted that he was on the legs in other court. He further submitted that M/s S.B. Mathur, Additional Government Advocate, O.P. Sharma and Ajit Bhandari are not present in the court and for this reason the case has been handed over to Mr. Garg when a panel lawyer is in fact, within a short space of time Mr. Khan, prepared the case and assisted the court to the utmost satisfaction and raised number of technical pleas. I think it proper to express my appreciation for Mr. Khan and would like that in future at least he should see that proper assistance is given by his colleagues to the court and the cases of the State Government do not go in default for not putting the case properly.

2. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree passed dated 13th November, 1972, passed by the learned District Judge, Alwar, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff-appellant. The plaintiff-appellant has filed a suit against the State of Rajasthan for compensation for the use and occupation of the disputed property. It is an admitted position that the final inventory of the property of His Highness of Alwar was prepared. Ex. A/5 relates to the disputed property. Under the covenant the disputed property was considered as private property with some conditions. The relevant portion runs as under:

"Vinay Vilas Place with Garden the Garrage and the Adjoining Sangars.

Ancestral. The Vinay Vilas Place Building will however remain in the possession and use of the State so long as it is required by Government for educational purpose. During this period the Building will be maintained by the State and the garden by the Ruler. The Building in which the Workshop and the Offices are housed at present and four garages will continue to remain in possession and use of the State so long as they are required for the Purpose."

3. The His Highness of Alwar gifted this property to Her Highness vide gift-deed dated 10th October, 1960 (Ex. 2). This fact is also not in dispute.

4. On behalf of the State, written statement was filed and thereafter the Court considering the pleadings framed the following issues on 13th September, 1971:

1- vk;k tknkn eqrnkfo;k jkt _f"k dkyst ds dk;Z o blrseky es vkrs jgus ds fy, Hkkjr ljdkj us eqn ua 1 dks nh blfy, eqnk;yk eqvkotk vnk djus dks ftEesokn ugh\ 2- vk;k vk;nkn eqrnfo;k dk eqvkotk ckcr ;wt ,.M vkD;wis'ku 2000@& ekfld gS\ 3- vk;k ckok eq[ukj [kkl 'kEHkwnRr 'kkL=h ds }kjk nl[krh ,oa rLnhd gksus ds dkj.k esUVsu,fcy ugh gS\ 4- eqcbZ fdl nknjlh dk eqLrgd gS\

5. On behalf of the plaintiff, Shri Shambhu Dutt has deposed that he is Mukhtiar-khas of the plaintiff and also proved the power of attorney Ex. 1. He has further deposed that this property was transferred by defendant No. 2 as His Highness of Alwar to the plaintiff vide a gift-deed, Ex. 2. He has submitted that there was no agreement for non-realisation of the rent. Repeated demands were made for the payment of the rent repeated demands were made for the payment of the rent but it was not but it was not paid. He has submitted that notice Ex. 3 was served on the State of Rajasthan.The rental value of this prope

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1985 Supreme(Raj) 419

Cases Referred (4)