MANOHARLAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff initiated an action claiming Rs. 10,100 - as compensation for not being allowed to pluck and remove myrobalan from the forests of certain villages in the Baihar tahsil of Balaghat District. The lower Court accepted the claim in part and passed a decree for Rs. 1.222. The plaintiff has appealed against that part of the decree by which his claim was dismissed. The defendant has filed a cross -objection against the claim decreed by the lower Court. This judgment will govern the appeal as well as the cross -objection.

(2.) IT is no longer disputed that, by three unregistered documents, the plaintiff purported to acquire from the proprietors of certain villages for consideration the right to rear and pluck for some years myrobalan in their forests and to take away the myrobalan so obtainable,. The details of those transactions are as given below: -

(3.) THE plaintiff claimed that the licenses which he had obtained from the proprietors of the aforementioned villages to take away myrobalan from their forests bound the defendant, in whom those villages subsequently vested by operation of law. However, the defendant did not permit the plaintiff to remove myrobalan from the forests in 1951 -52 and sold away the produce to other persons. According to the plaintiff, this wrongful act of the defendant entitled him to claim damages which he assessed at Rs. 10,100.