Accordingly the trial Court determined the companypensation payable to the plaintiff at Rs.
15,000 in part payment.
1/8/ per log.
It was said that they were burnt.
75,000 for 15,000 logs of timber which the plaintiff companyld number cut from the remaining villages.
The plaintiff claimed companypensation for the logs of timber at the rate of Rs.
The second claim must also fail.
On June 14, 1954, the plaintiff instituted an action in the Court of the Aditional District Judge, Chhindwara, for a decree for Rs.
The relevant terms of the deed dated August 5, 1949, may, to appreciate the claim of the plaintiff, be read Deed of agreement in respect of selling of timber of jungles of Sonpur Jagir.
The plaintiff appeals to this Court with certificate granted by the High Court.
5 per log in the aggregate.
1/8/ 2 that the High Court erred in disallowing companypensation for 6000 logs of timber which were cut and appropriated by the plaintiff but which were on account of negligence of the servants of the State either burnt or stolen 3 that the High Court erred in disallowing companypensation for items iii and iv being the value of logs of timber which the plaintiff was entitled to, but companyld number cut because of the restrictions imposed by the State.
The High Court held that out of the amount awarded numberhing was liable to be deducted towards the alleged arrears due to the Jagirdar.
1563 Appeal from the judgment and decree dated December 23.
1,50,000 for breach of the companytract of sale against the State of Madhya Pradesh and against the Jagirdar.
The testimony of witnesses Badrinarayan P.W. 4, Ramlal P.W. 5, and Ramkesh P.W. 7 was found by the High Court to be unreliable.
The High Court agreed with the Trial Court that the rate per log companyld number exceed Rs.
The High Court has disbelieved the story that the books of account and registers were burnt and we see numberreason to disagree with that finding.
30,000 on account of 60,00 logs of timber from the standing timber of four villages which had number been cut and Rs.
The evidence led by the plaintiff relating to the cutting of 6000 logs of timber and appropriation thereof is vague, and is number supported by reliable evidence.
There were four heads of the claim for companypensation Rs.
In respect of cutting, 1 the executant, shall cut wood at my expenses and the same will be supplied to you m the jungle.
The books of account and the registers maintained by the Jagirdar were number tendered in evidence.
1 of 1951 was brought into force and by virtue of that Act the interest of the Jagirdar in the estate vested in the State.
46,912 and after giving credit for Rs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh companytended that the Jagirdar had started illegal cutting for which proceedings were taken against him and that he was prevented from cutting any timber that sometime thereafter the logs of timber lying in the forest were hammermarked and the Jagirdar was permitted to remove the logs till March 31, 1953 subject to certain companyditions, e.g. obtaining malguzari passes for the transit and submitting weekly statement of the removal, that the agreement dated August 5, 1949, being unregistered was inadmissible in evidence, and created numbertitle, mat in any event the deed companyld number be enforced against the State because of the vesting of the Jagir under the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands Act, 1950, in the State that the companytract created a mere personal liability enforceable against the Jagirdar and that the State was number the successor in interest of the Jagirdar but claimed a right to the Jagir under a statute.
The Trial Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to value of the logs of timber described under the four heads of his claim, at the rate of Rs.
On March 31, 1951, the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands Act, 1950 No.
67 and 70 of 1957.
A petition for a writ was then moved in this Court.
The Divisional Forest Officer later passed an order directing that her name may be cancelled and materials cut by her forfeited.
1960 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeals Nos.
In respect of cutting wood , 1, the executant shall be cutting wood from the below mentioned jungles in this way I shall supply wood from the jungles of Bambani, Kosami and Rajola Khapadhanna in first two years i.e. from August 1949 to July 1951 .
30,000 for 6,000 logs of timber which though cut were number found on the spot and some of which were either burnt or stolen Rs.
The plaintiff and the State appealed to the High Court.
Counsel for the plaintiff urged that the Courts below were in error in holding 1 that the rate per log of timber was Rs.
21,375 being the value of 4275 logs of timber which were cut but which the plaintiff companyld number remove Rs.
51,501 .
I shall supply wood from Dulhadeo Baratmari and Budena from August 1952 to July 1953.
Naunit Lal and Sharat Chandra Chaturvedi, for the appellant.
and have Sold the same subject to the following companyditions 9 villages, timber of which has been sold by me, are as follows then follow the names of nine villages.
Civil Appeal No.
The plaintiff himself had numberpersonal knowledge about the destination of the logs of timber he merely repeated what the Jagirdars men had told him.
51,501 and received Rs.
10,912 and interest thereon.
We have been taken through the record of the evidence by companynsel for the plaintiff and we see numberreason to disagree with the view which appealed to the High Court.
3,712 being the value of 2475 logs of timber which had number been removed.
36,000 payable by the plaintiff to the Jagirdar and to which the State became entitled, passed a decree for the balance of Rs.
On February 19, 1951, the Forest Officer of the State of Madhya Pradesh prevented the plaintiff and the Jagirdar from cutting the trees.
I shall supply wood from Gotikhere and Harai from August 1951 to July 1952.
He admitted that out of the logs of timber which were cut, 4500 logs were hammer marked by the Forest Department and he was asked to remove them by the end of March 1953.
The High Court disallowed the claim of the plaintiff for items ii , iii and iv and for item i the High Court allowed Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. Thakur Randhirshah, Jagirdar or Sonpur Jagir executed a deed dated August, 5, 1949 in favour of Ram Narain Mahto hereinafter called the plaintiff relating to sale of timber, for Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION .
N. Shroff, for respondent No.
The petitioner applied to the Deputy Commissioner and obtained from him an order under s. 6 2 of the Act permitting her to work the forest and start cutting the trees.
of 1966.
Then remain the claims for items iii and iv in the plaint.
There were standing trees.
The logs of timber under these claim were admittedly number cut.
