OM PRAKASH JAIN Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A partnership firm carrying on business in the name and style of 'V.K.Industries and Fabricators' was constituted on September 10, 1966 and with the mutual consent of the partners was dissolved. The firm was registered as a Small Scale Industrial Unit with the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The appellant claims to have purchased the assets and goodwill of 'V.K.Industries and Fabricators', along with its name and sought registration as a SSI Unit as a 're-roller'.

(2.) AT an auction conducted by the General Manager Northern Railway on November 05, 1966, 'V.K.Industries and Fabricators' participated as a bidder knowing fully well that only registered re-rollers could bid for the sale of re-rollable scrap. The highest bid was made by the appellant. 400 MTs of scrap was offered to be purchased by him @Rs. 460/- per MT and he deposited Rs. 46,000/-, being 25% of the bid amount. On the bid being confirmed he deposited the remaining sum of Rs. 1,38,000/- on November 16, 1966 as also loading charges in sum of Rs. 1,400/-. On November 21 and 22, 1966 he took delivery of 61.92 MTs of scrap, valued at Rs. 28,699.92, but could not lift the rest because an issue arose regarding the entitlement of 'V.K.Industries and Fabricators' to bid at the auction. The issue was in respect of a certificate dated November 04, 1966 purportedly issued under the signatures of one V.N.Dwivedi, District Industries Officer, Ghaziabad. It was suspected to be a forged certificate. CBI had registered RC No.12 of 1967 for offences punishable under Sections 420/471/120-B IPC.

(3.) VARIOUS issues were settled and some of them were decided in favour of the appellant. Declining specific performance of the contract which, was sought for under the guise of being permitted to lift the auctioned goods, the learned Single Judge held that the certificate relied upon was a forged document and thus 'V.K.Industries and Fabricators' could not bid at the auction. The learned Single Judge further opined that being goods, specific performance could not be enforced and there being no evidence of damages suffered held that the appellant would be entitled to a decree only in sum of Rs. 1,56,700/-; being the price paid and proportionate freight charges for goods which were not permitted to be lifted.