PANCHANAN DAS Vs. PROVINCE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff in both the Courts below has brought this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 15-3-1950, of Sri G.R. Rao, Addl. Subordinate Judge of Balasore, arising out of a suit brought by. the plaintiff for recovery of compensation of Rs. 3620/12/- in the following circumstances : Defendant No. 1 is the Province of Orissa and defendants 2 to 6 are the members of the Food Distribution Committee. On 11-7-1943, the District Magistrate of Balasore requisitioned, under Rule 75A of the Defence of India Rules, 15 bags of rice and the entire quantity of paddy found in the four granaries belonging to the appellant. Defendants 2 to 6 were directed by the District Magistrate to dispose of the paddy at Rs. 8/-per maund and pay the sale-proceeds to the appellant. The paddy was actually seized on 11-7-1943 and kept under lock and key. The appellant having executed a zimanama the stock was kept in his custody. 3rd and 4th of October, 1943, were the dates fixed for sale of the stock seized. The price of the paddy on the date of seizure after requisition was Rs. 8/- per maund. The sale could not be in fact held on 3rd and 4th of October, 1943. The plaintiff had put in an application on 16-9-1943 that the entire stock seized may not be sold and the plaintiff would be allowed to retain a portion of the seized paddy for the consumption of his tenants and debtors. The plaintiff had. further put in a petition on 30-9-1943 (Ext. 8). that the gazette rate of paddy on 3rd and 4th of October, 1943 being Rs. 9/8/-per maund the stock should not be sold at Rs. 8/-as directed by the District Magistrate. The paddy was actually sold on 3rd and 4th October, 1944, and fetched value at the rate of Rs. 5/6/-per maund. According to the plaintiff, the paddy seized was 1196 maunds. It is to be mentioned here that in fact the requisition order had expired on 15-111943. The plaintiff fixes the compensation on the basis of the difference of the price of the paddy on the date of actual seizure on 11-7-1943, that is at Rs. 8/- per maund, and the price actually fetched by the sale on 3rd and 4th October 1944, that is, at Rs. 5/6/- per maund the difference being Rs. 2/10/- per maund. He has assessed the compensation for paddy at Rs. 3140/12/-Regarding the rice he claims the entire value of the 30 mds. of rice seized on the ground that on account of the seizure the rice deteriorated and became unfit for human consumption.

(2.) The lower appellate Court has confirmed the decree passed by the trial Court dismissing the suit of the plaintiff on the ground that the present suit is not maintainable under the provisions of the Defence of India Act, 1939, the plaintiff's remedy being confined only to the provisions of the said Act as contained in Rule 75A. He has also dismissed the suit on the ground of limitation. He has further found that it was on account of the fault of the plaintiff himself that the stock seized could not be sold on the dates fixed by the District Magistrate, that is, oh 3rd and 4th of October, 1943. It has been found that on the expiry, of the order of requisition the plaintiff was absolutely; free to sell the paddy and the plaintiff's claim for compensation on the difference of price on the date of requisition and on the dates of actual sale, that is, on 3rd and 4th October, 1944, must be negatived.

(3.) it is to be observed at the outset that the appeal against respondents 2 to 6, that is, the members of the Pood Distribution Committee, was not pressed before us and Mr. Sinha, appearing on behalf of the appellant, confined his appeal against respondent No. 1 (Province of Orlssa). Section 14, Defence of India Act, 1939, recognises the ordinary remedies available to the parties under the Civil and Criminal Courts in the country but restricts their jurisdiction only to the extent as expressly provided by the provisions of the Act. The learned Advocate-General, appearing on behalf of the' State, strongly relies upon Sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act running as follows: