MUTHU MOHAMMED RAWTHER Vs. PATHANAMTHITTA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant is the appellant. PW-1 the Special Officer of the plaintiff published Ext. A1 notifying the right to vend mutton in the three permanent stalls in Pathanamthitta market for one year ending with 31-2-1981 would be auctioned on 4-3-1980. Defendant deposited earnest money of Rs. 500/- and participated in the auction. He was the highest bidder. He did not deposit one-fourth of the bid amount and also did not execute the necessary agreement. Therefore Ext. A3 notice was issued by the plaintiff to the defendant intimating him that the sale is cancelled, and that the said right would be reauctioned at the risk and costs of the defendant. Defendant sent Ext. A-4 reply denying his liability. Thereafter the plaintiff published Ext. A5 notice for reauction and in the auction held on 18-3-1980 the highest bid was only Rs. 5,001/-, whereas the highest bid by the defendant in the previous auction was Rs. 12,380/-. The suit was filed for recovery of the difference in the sale amount as damages after deducting Rs. 500/- the earnest money which was forfeited.

(2.) Defendant contended that there was only a provisional acceptance by the plaintiff; there was no concluded contract. Therefore, he maintained he cannot be held liable in damages for breach of contract. It was also contended that inasmuch as the defendant did not deposit one-fourth of the sale amount as per Ext. A1 notification, no confirmation was possible and on that ground also there was no concluded contract.

(3.) The Trial Court decreed the suit. The appeal by the defendant was dismissed by the lower appellate court. Now the defendant has come up in Second Appeal.