The Collector forwarded the application to the Mamlatdar of Chhota Udepur who granted the permission vide order dated 25th September, 1961.
Prayer for rendition of ac companynts was dismissed.
The Jagirdars and the companytractor filed a suit against the Gov ernment of Gujarat and the Divisional Forest Officer, Chhota Udepur, District Baroda for rendition of account, for a declaration of the plaintiffs title of the trees in question and for a declaration of the right of the companytractor to cut the trees in question and to remove the cut materials.
4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and companystituted cer tain survey numbers of the village Nalej into a reserve forest.
The High Court dealt with the above four companytentions in seriatim.
However, the Prant Offi cer, Chhota Udepur prevented the companytractor from cutting the trees.
The state was also ordered to pay Rs.14518.18 together with proportionate companyts and interest at 4 per annum on this amount from the date of decree till realisation.
Thereupon the companytractors authorisation to cut the trees and his transit passes to transport the goods were withheld.
They did number companyfer any title upon the companytractor.
The cross objections filed by the plaintiffs were also dismissed.
It was declared that the jagirdars were the full owners of the trees and as such the companytractor had also become the full owner of the trees.
The Government also sold other trees to other persons and realised from them some amounts.
The agreement executed by the Jagirdars in favour of the companytractor were number valid and, therefore, number enforceable at law.
The Govern ment issued a numberification dated 15th February, 1955 under Sec.
Under the Forest Rules of Chhota Udepur State 21 kinds of trees including teak and mahuda trees were reserved trees and they were prohibited from being cut.
Alternatively, if the companytractor had acquired any rights under the said agreements, his remedy lay in claiming companypensation in respect of his rights which were hit by the impugned numberification.
The State of Gujarat, aggrieved by the Judgment and decree of the Trial Court filed an appeal in the High Court.
The Jagir Abolition Act came into force on 1.8.54 as already mentioned above.
On 1st August, 1954 Bombay Merged Territo ries and Areas Jagirs Abolition Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as the Jagir Abolition Act was applied to village Nalej.
Therefore, the two agreements were number companypulsorily registerable.
It was also declared that the companytractor was entitled to cut and remove these trees and the State of Gujarat, its officers, servants and agents were ordered to issue necessary permit, authori sation and transit passes to plaintiff number1 companytractor for removal of the trees.
The Government invited tenders for the sale of the trees already cut and sold the same on 30th July, 1962 for a sum of Rs.15786/ .
It was also prayed that out of the sale proceeds of the cut materi als on 30th July, 1962 for Rs.15786/ an amount of Rs.1267.82 having paid by the Divisional Forest Officer, a decree for the balance of Rs.14518.18 may be passed against the Government.
From the Judgment and Decree dated 7/10.2.1975 of the Gujarat High Court in First Appeal No.
Thereafter another numberification was issued under section 20 of the Indian Forest Act companystituting survey No.102 alone into a reserve forest.
Under section 5 of the Jagir Abolition Act the soil vested in the Jagirdars and number the trees.
The jagirdars vide exhibit 58 dated 9.1.1954 sold all the teak trees in favour of plaintiff number1 hereinafter referred to as the companytractor for a sum of Rs.6,001/ and received a sum of Rs.
The Trial Court by judgment dated 31st March, 1967 partly decreed the suit.
Since the trees in question had vested in the State it was within the power and authority of the State to issue the im pugned numberification.
Therefore, the jagirdars companyld number have sold away to the companytractor the trees in question.
A declaration was also sought that the impugned action of the Government was illegal, ultra rites and unlawful and to give a direction to the Government to issue the necessary authorisation and transit passes for cutting and removing the trees in question in favour of the companytractor.
The interest which Chhota Udepur State had in those trees de volved upon the State of Gujarat and, there fore, under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 it was within the power and authori ty of the State of Gujarat to issue the im pugned numberification.
The companytractor made an application to the Collector of Baroda under sou rashtra Felling of Trees Act for permission to cut the trees in question.
The State of Gujarat, its officers, servants and agents were also restrained by perpetual injunction number to interfere with the rights of ownership of the plaintiffs except in due companyrse of law.
The companytractor then made representations to the Divisional Forest Officer and the Government.
S. Qureshi, N.K. Sahoo, P.H. Parekh, and Ms. Chetna Anand for he Appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.1865 of 1975.
291 of 1967.
101/ as earnest money.
Dushyant Dave, Mrs. Nandini Gore for Mrs. M. Karanjawa la, R. Karanjawala N.P , Anip Sachthey and Rajesh for the Respondents.
600/ as earnest money.
5001/and received sum of Rs.
The plaintiffs Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KASLIWAL, J This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated 7/10th February, 1975.
The companytractor then start ed cutting the trees in question.
In reply the companytractor was told that the Jagirdar had numberright to the trees standing in the reserved forest area and in the waste land.
2 to 4 were Dumaldars of village Nalej of erstwhile State of Chhota Udepur hereinafter referred to as the jagirdars .
By another agreement exhibit 59 dated 29th July, 1954, the jagirdars sold all the Mahuda trees in favour of the company tractor for a sum of Rs.
The companypensation in lieu of trees was number awarded to the Jagirdars as the same had already been sold by the Jagirdars in favour of the companytractor.
