VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants second appeal in a suit for recovery oi Rs. 1,150.00 being the balance amount said to be due for the Ekka-Tonga stand contract for the year 1961-62 in the Collect-orate Compound at Mainpuri. The defendant was the highest bidder at an auction held on 6th April 1961 for the said contract. His bid was Rs. 1,250.00. The bid was accepted by the Collector and the defendant was required to deposit l/4th of the contract amount bid by him. He deposited Rs. 100.00 and applied for time to deposit the balance. The defendant did not, however, pay any part of the balance contract money in spite of demands; hence the suit.

(2.) The defence was that the plaintiff had no right to enter into the contract or to auction the same and that the legal formalities for the sale of the contract had not been completed and further that at the time of the auction the defendant had been assured that proper arrangements will be made by the plaintiff to help the defendant in realising fees from Ekka-Tonga using the stand, but, on account of the public agitation, the defendant could recover nothing and he applied to Collector either to make adequate arrangement through the police for helping him in realising the fees or to cancel the contract and refund the amount of Rs. 100.00 deposited by him, but no reply was received to his application, nor were any steps taken to complete the contract in writing by any authority of the defendant. The defendant further alleged that a notice dated 22nd June, 1961 was received from the Collector informing him that if the l/4th amount of the contract money was not paid within three days, the contract would be cancelled, but the defendant did not deposit the l/4th amount and the contract must be deemed to have been cancelled and that the defendant is not liable to pay anything. The defendant further alleged that he never recovered any money from Ekka-Tongawalas and the plaintiffs allegation to the contrary was incorrect.

(3.) The trial court framed as many as 9 issues in the case. It found on issue No. 1 that the plaintiff had the right to auction the Theka for Ekka-Tonga stand on issues Nos. 2 and 6, that no assurance was given to the defendant that the plaintiff would assist in realisation of the dues from Ekka-Tongawalas and that there was no failure on the part of the plaintiff to perform any of the terms of the contract; on issues Nos. 3 and 5 that the defendant did realise fees from Ekka-Tongawalas and continued to do so throughout; on issue No. 4 that the failure of the defendant to pay the balance of the 1/4th amount within three days and the Col lectors letter dated 22nd June, 1961 did not amount a revocation of the contract; on issue No. 7 that the suit was not barred by limitation; and on issues Nos. 8 and 9 that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of Rs. 1,150.00 as claimed by it.