By the letter, dated October 8, 1945, the second respondent issued the following directions to the appellants under S. 244 of the Municipalities Act 1 The Atta should number be sold for feeding animals kept for dairy purposes 2 flour less than one full bag should number, be sold to one individual 3 there should be a distinctive label on every bag companytaining the warning that the companytents companyld be used for animals only and were unfit for human companysumption and 4 any officer of the Nagarpalika number below the rank of a Sanitary Inspector would be allowed free access to the shop in which the Atta was stored for the purpose of inspecting sales and examin ing the account books.
and as the delay affects the quality of the Atta.
This order was extended till September 20, 1945 by another order, dated September 18, 1945.
The order was with respect to 2048 bags of Atta seized by the magistrate in companynection with the criminal case The order permitted the appellants to dispose of the flour subject to the following companyditions 1 they should engage a salesman approved by the second respondent to sell the Atta 2 they should keep a separate stock book and sales book in respect of the Atta.
The two central issues are 1 whether the respondents are liable to pay damages in the circumstances of the case and 2 if so, what is the quantum of their liability.
Loss was cause to them on account of delay in sale due to their intervention.
It was declared unfit for human companysumption.
Appeal by certificate from the judgment and decree dated May 25, 1962 of the Allahabad High Court in Appeal No.
The appellants were prosecuted for offences under ss.
P. C. prohibiting the appellants from selling the flour for one month.
The first respondent is the Agra Mahapalika the second respondent is the Health Officer of the Mahapalika.
On May 17, 1945, the second respondent reported to the Administrator of the Nagarpalika that the flour was in a decomposed and deteriorated companydition and was unfit for human companysumption.
They sent a reminder on September 24, 1945.
It was emphasised in the letter that the directions mentioned in the letter of September 17, 1945 should be carried out by them.
They said that the Atta companyld also be used for animal food and wanted permission to sell it for animal food after mixing gram dal chuni with it.
The respondents denied their liability.
The magistrate acquitted the appellants on September 5, 1945.
He admitted in the report that the firm of the appellants has set up a placard to say it flour is companydemned atta and unfit for companysumption.
1809 of 1967.
According to them, the appellants took numbersteps to prevent the sale of flour for human companysumption.
The present appeal is directed against the decree of the High Court.
The Military Dairy Farm at Agra was in possession of a certain quantity of wheat flour.
The appellants started selling the flour from March 20, 1945.
They ended the letter by saying that immediate attention should be paid to their request as they have already suffered great loss at their hands due to wrongful seizure etc.
On the second issue the High Court has given numberfinding.
The respondents, by their letter, dated September 27, 1945, informed them that the appointment of Nanu Mal as salesman was approved.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The appellants are the partners of the firm Shiam Lal Radhey Lal.
On September 17, 1945 the second respondent issued an order under s. 244 of the U.P. Municipalities Act.
They gave numberreply to the request of the appellants for the sale of flour for animal food.
On July 26, 1945 an order was issued under s. 144 Cr.
It was purchased for the firm.
328 of 1950.
In the operative portion of the judgment he gave this direction Since this Atta is numberious ,to public health and it is number possible to prevent its reaching companysumers even though the accused had best intention without effective regulation 1 order that the entire Atta still be taken possession of by the Municipal medical officer of Health who will kindly regulate its disposal in companysonance with companysiderations to the owner as is necessary to prevent its being used as food.
They said that their action was bona fide and in the interest of public safety and health and in pursuance of the directions given by the magistrate.
N. Sharma and C. P. Lal, for the respondents.
4 and 14 of the U.P. Prevention of Adulteration Act and s. 273 I.P.C. The flour was seized by the order of the magistrate And kept in the custody of the appellants until further orders.
On the first issue the High Court has held that the respondents are number liable at all.
The Nagarpalika reported the matter to the District Magistrate, Agra.
There should be a companyumn for the signature of the buyers 3 the Atta should be gold only for being used as lehi to recognised book binders and shoe merchants etc.
According to the appellants, it was fit for being used as lehi, manure and ratab for companysumption by animals.
34,000 as damages.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DWIVEDI, J. The appellants instituted a suit against the respondents for recovery of Rs.
Broadly stated, their case was that the respondents initially stopped them from selling the flour and subsequently imposed restriction on its sale, which effectively prevented the sale.
In the sales book the names and addresses of all buyers should be mentioned.
K. Daphtary and Rameshwar Nath, for the appellants.
By his letter, dated October 6, 1945, the second respondent, however, permitted them to sell the flour for animal food under certain companyditions.
The trial companyrt decreed the suit, but the High Court of Allahabad reversed the decree and dismissed the suit.
The suit was grounded on tortious liability.
The Atta has already been kept frozen for too long a time and I would request the medical officer to kindly expedite action in this.
Copy of this order may be sent to medical officer of Health immediately.
and 4 they should submit weekly return of sale to the Nagarpalika.
By their letter, dated September 22, 1945, the appellants replied to this letter.
