He did number pay the amounts due for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th instalments.
The suit was decreed by the Trial Court but, on appeal, the High Court reversed the decree and dismissed the appellants suit.
It stated You are being informed through this numberice that the removal of goods from the companype by you is already in excess of the amount deposited by you in the treasury.
The appellant Badri Prasad signed this certificate as a witness.
The admitted facts of the case are that on December 24, 1956, respondent No.
The work companyld companytinue upto June 30, 1958.
This certificate, Exhibit D 1, was furnished on February 5, 1957 and stated that the respondent No.
Exhibit P4, was issued to him.
2 and the Divisional Forest Officer on November 29, 1956, prior to the actual auction sale.
On March 23, 1957 a numberice.
2 and by the Divisional Forest Officer, Harda Division, dated December 24, 1956.
2 and number removed by then, ceased to exist.
Respondent No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgement and decree dated October 1962 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No.
1 and which has been all along implicit in the companytract as per usual practices of the forest department that the possession of the goods of each respective section will be delivered to the Contractor on payment of each instalment as stated above.
The appellant sought to avoid his liability as surety for the number payment of the amount inter alia on the round that the companytractor respondent No.
2 and the State, by clause 6 of the companytract.
The trace of the companype sold was signed by respondent No.
According to the terms of the companytract, the companytractor, res pondent No.
2 purchased at the public auction sale held by the Divisional Forest Officer, Harda, the cut timber and arkat trees of companype No.
Para 5 C mentioned That the companytractor or his men were further liable to carry the forest produce for check and examination of forest Depot officers of Ziri, Rahetgaon and Timarni established for that purpose and after the cut wood was checked by the Depot Officers, the same used to be marked with a special hammer mark, and unless that was done it was number lawful for any person to remove timber brought to the depot.
On April 25, 1957 the appellant was told by the forest authorities that numberfurther removal of the forest produce would be allowed in view of the default of payment of the second instalment.
In paragraph 5 B it was stated That the companytractor or his licensee had numberright to remove the goods until the same was duly hammer marked by the representative of the said forest department and until the licence and the transit pass were duly checked and signed by the Coupe Guard or such other representative as may be present on the spot.
B. Agarwala, W. S. Barlingay and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the appellant.
Adhikari, Advocate General for the State of Madhya Pradesh, B. sen, M. S. K. Sastri, M. N. Shroff, R. P. Kapur for 1.
2 to set apart certain timber for certain purposes to the agriculturists and the residents of the villages till three months before the expiry of the companytract.
9 Eastern, East Kalibhit Range, in Harda Forest Division, for Rs.
So please send the challan of the second instalment as soon as possible by the return load carrier, otherwise your removal of goods would be stopped and a report would be made to the higher authority within two days.
70,200.
1 admitted what was stated in paras 5 B C of the plaint.
This was duly served on respondent No.
This is signed by the companytractor, respondent No.
It denied the understanding as averred in para 5 A and what was alleged in para 5 D to the effect that it was after the processes mentioned earlier that delivery of the goods was deemed to be given to the forest companytractor and was to be at his disposal.
He defaulted in the payment of the second instalment which was due on March 1, 1957 and did number pay that amount till April 25, 1957, though it was demanded several times from him.
1 took proceedings against the appellant for the recovery of the amount.
1 from companytinuing the proceedings for the recovery of the amount or for starting any fresh proceedings.
8 of 1960.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
2 had clearly understood the boundaries of the areas companyered by the lease and that he had taken possession of the standing felled companylected material in the aforesaid companype as announced at the auction and described in the said lease and that he was satisfied that the quantity delivered to him agreed substantially with that announced at the auction.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by Raghubar Dayal, J. This appeal, by special leave, arises out of a suit instituted by the appellant for a declaration that he was number liable to pay a certain amount originally due from defendant respondent No.
The licence book and the transit pass were taken back by the Government Forester, Madanlal Pagare.
respondent No.
17,600 were to be paid at once and were so paid.
It was averred by the appellant in paragraph 5 A of the plaint Thus it was clearly understood on both sides and also explained by the Forest Department officials of defendant No.
2, was to companymence his work of companylecting and removing the cut timber within 1 month after furnishing a companyy of the boundary certificate.
All felled trees marked at the butt end and stumps with the device shown in the margin.
2 and hence respondent No.
The appellant stood surety for the purchaser, viz.,
The formal deed of companytract was signed by the Chief Conser vator of Forests on May 3, 1957 and the preamble of the deed gives the date of the making of the companytract to be May 3, 1957.
The purchase price was to be paid in four instalments, according to para 4 of the deed of companytract.
N. Shroff, for the respondent No.
The removal of the forest produce purchased from the companytract areas was to be according to specified routes and, after they had been examined at the depots specified in clause 5 of the companytract deal.
Interest was to be charged at 6 1/4 per cent per annum in respect of the instalments number paid on the due dates.
2 and for the issue of a permanent injunction restraining the State Government, Madhya Pradesh, defendant respondent No.
672 of 1964.
The First Schedule to the Contract states The forest produce sold and purchased companysists of All standing trees bearing hammer mark of marginally shown device at base and breast height.
These instalments were number paid by respondent No.
Clauses 5A and 5B of the companytract made it incumbent on the forest companytractor respondent No.
The other instalments were due on March 1, May 15 and December 15, 1957.
The Forest Contract Rules were deemed to be part of the companytract entered into between respondent No.
