LAWS(MPH)-2013-2-29

MANDSAUR NAGAR SUDHAR NYAS Vs. BHARAT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Decided On February 14, 2013
Mandsaur Nagar Sudhar Nyas Appellant
V/S
Bharat Construction Company Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's first appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the IInd Additional District Judge Mandsaur in Civil Suit No. 29-B/94.

(2.) FACTS which are relevant and necessary for deciding this appeal may be stated as under. Plaintiff is a partnership firm. It owned agriculture land bearing survey No. 248 in village Bhooniyakhedi, Tehsil and District Mandsaur. Plaintiff sought and was granted permission to divert the land in order to develop a colony; plaintiff also obtained Colonizer's Licence and layout of plots was sanctioned under M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973. Appellant demanded vide Notice dated 26.10.1987 development, supervision and other charges. The total amount demanded was Rs. 1,326,520.00. Under a bonafide belief that the village Bhooniyakhedi was within the limits of appellant therefore plaintiff paid Rs.72,920.00 and entered into an agreement to pay the balance amount in instalments. Subsequently, it was discovered that village Bhooniyakhedi was outside the limits of the appellant, therefore it was unjustified in demanding and accepting Rs. 72,920.00; plaintiff, therefore asked for the refund of Rs.72,920.00 paid under mistaken belief. When appellant failed to return the said amount, plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of said amount and declaration that the agreement to pay the balance amount was void and under the said agreement plaintiff was not liable to any amount.

(3.) ON the material placed on record, learned trial Court found in favour of plaintiff on all issues including on the issue that village in question was outside the Municipal limits; payment of Rs. 72,920.00 was paid under a bonafide mistake and as such appellant was liable to refund the amount of Rs. 72,920.00 paid to it and also declared that the agreement dated 19.11.1987 was void. With these findings Court decreed the suit with costs.