LexRAM NARAIN MAHTO versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
ff
RAM NARAIN MAHTO
v.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
September 16, 1969
[J. C. SHAH, V. RAMASWAMI AND A. N. GROVER, JJ.)
S11/e of (iood.v Act, 1930 . .
~s. 18 and 21-lvfadhya Pradesh Abolition of
Pr1>perty Rights (Es1,1tes, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act I of 1950-Ja~ir
dar St'lling tiniber of specified {!irth tn be cut by buyer froni
standl~lg
rret .~-Jagir restinR in state 1111der }J.P. Act I of 1950--Jf buyer can claun
co111pr'll.\'fttion fo.1• logv not cut fro111 standing trees on date of vesting.
A Jagirdar executed a deed on August 5, 1949 in •favour of the appel-
lant for the sale of logs of a spe<:ified girth to be obtained from cutting
th• trees in his forests.
On February 19, 1951 the Forest Oft!cer of the
r<!ipon<lent State prevented the appellant and the Jagirdar from cuttin11 the
tr.... On the coming into force of the Madhya Pradesh Act I al 1951,
the inlerest of the Jagirda·r in his estate vested in the respondent State.
The appellant instituted a suit in June 1954 against the respnndent State
and the Jagirdar for breach of contract and claimed compensation (i) for
le>g• 11 hicli were cut but which he could not remove; (ii) for logs which
were cut but were. stated to have been lost due to the negligence of the
respondent; and (iii) logs from the standing timber which had not been
cut or could not be cut by the appellant 'from the jagirdar's villages. The
respondent State contested the suit on the ground inter alia that the deed
coul<l not be enforced against it because of the vesting of the Jagir under
the Act in the State and that the contract created a mere personal liability
against the Jai:irdat. The Trial Court granted the appellant a decree for
compensation under all the beads claimed at a rate per log determined by
the Court. The High Court in appeal disallowed the appelhnt's claim
tinder items (ii) and (iii). In appeal to this Court by certificate it wa.
contended on behalf of the appellant that tlte rate of compensation deter-
mined was inadequate; that the High Court erred in disallowing compensa-
l!on for the logs which were cut but were lost, and that it had wrongly
disallowed the claim for value cif logs of timber which the appellant was
entitled to, but could not cut because of the restrictions imposed by the
State.
HELD : Dismissing the appeal,
(i) On the evidence, the High Court had rightly disallowed the claim
in rc;pect of logs cut but which were stated to have been lost.
(ii) Where a thing is attached to, or forms part of, land at the time
of the contract and wbich is to be severed by the buyer, under s. 18 of
the Sale of Goods Act the property in the thing passes in the absence of a
contract to the contrary to the buyer on the severance cif the thing from
the land. Again under s. 21 of the Act, even. if there be a contract for
the sale of specific goods, but the seller is obliged under the terms of tile
con~t to do something to the goods for the purposo of putting them iato
a deliverable state, the property passes only when the thing agreed to be
done is done and the buyer is informed thereof. [453 DJ
·
In the present case the. contract by its terms was for the sale of log~
out of trees in the forest with a girth of two feet or more; but the timber
had to be cut and had to be put in a deliverable state.
Before the trees
446
SUPREME COUllT REPORTS
[1970] 2 S.C.lt
were cut and the logs
appropriated to the contract, the estate of the
A
Jagirdar vested in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The appellant's claim
to cut standing trees in the forests of the Jagir after they vested in the
State was therefore rightly negatived. [456 F-G]
Badische Anilill Fabrik v. Hickron, [1906) A.C. 419 at p. 421; Kursel/
v. Timber Operators and Comractors Ltd., [1927) 1 K.B. 298; Chhota-
bhai Jethabhai Patel & Company v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, [1953)
S.C.R. 476; Shrimati Shantabai v. State of Bombay & Ors. [1959) S.C.R.
C
265; Mahadeo v. The State of Bombay, [1959) Supp. (2) S.C.R. 339;
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Yakunuddin,
[1963)
S.C.R.
13; referred
to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICT'')N:
Civil Appeal No, 1563
of 1966.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated December 23,
C
1960 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeals Nos. 67
and 70 of 1957.
Naunit Lal and Sharai Chandra Chaturvedi, for t!1e appellant.
I. N. Shroff, for respondent No. 1.
D
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Shah, J.
Thakur RandhExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.