SANT RAM SHARMA Vs. NOKH RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff instituted a suit for damages against the defendant comprised in the sum of Rs.6,60,800/-, claim whereof for monetary damages stood anchored upon the averred fact of the defendant uprooting 150 khair trees located upon his land whereupon he avers qua his in the manner delineated in the plaint suffering damages quantified in the sum aforesaid. The suit of the plaintiff stood dismissed by the learned trial Court. The plaintiff stands aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court wherefrom he has instituted the instant appeal before this Court whereupon he concerts to assail the findings recorded therein.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff is having his land at village Nehra, Pargana Bara Bahal, Tehsil Suni, District Shimla, In April 1999, the defendant approached the plaintiff for the purchase of standing trees of khair at the cost of Rs.500/- per feet and the value of the one tree was valued to be approximately Rs.1500/-. The khair trees were alleged to be grown on the suit land as delineated in the plaint. An agreement to this effect was executed by the defendant with the plaintiff. It is alleged that at that time it was agreed that threes would be cut by cutting them at one feet height from the ground and no damage would be caused to the stumps and crops standing in the fields. According to the plaintiff, the defendant has cut 150 trees of Khair from the suit land which have been uprooted alongwith the roots thereby causing permanent loss of khair trees and by doing this the defendant has deprived the plaintiff from the regrowth of khair trees. It is pleaded that if khair tree is not removed from the root, new buds sprout within a year from the stumps and within about 5 to 6 years a new tree grows to a full extent. According to the plaintiff, by uprooting the khair trees, the defendant has caused huge loss to the plaintiff in terms of money because the plaintiff would not get new crop of khair trees after five or six years and will have to plant new trees at his own costs. It is alleged that value of the stumps and roots are double than the value of rest of the part of khair trees, as such, the plaintiff has suffered loss to the tune of Rs.2,25,000/-. It is also pleaded by that uprooting the trees, the defendant has caused loss to the standing crops of the plaintiff amount to Rs.40,800/- and will have to spend Rs.20,000/- to fill up the holes and pits uprooted by the defendant. It is further pleaded that defendant has paid only a sum of Rs.75000/- to the plaintiff and remaining payment of Rs.1,50,000/- is balance and after calculating all the above referred amount the plaintiff is entitled to a sum of Rs.6,60,800/-from the defendant.

(3.) The defendants contested the suit and filed written statement and averred that there is no privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant with respect to subject and amount claimed in the suit and hence the suit is not maintainable. It is also prayed that this suit deserves dismissal and as such should be dismissed with compensatory cost under Section 35-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The defendant has admitted regarding the entering into of an agreement for sale of khair trees by the plaintiff and has pleaded that the entire amount as per the agreement has been paid to the plaintiff. But the plaintiff has not given him even a single khair tree and therefore he has a right to recover the same from the plaintiff alongwith interest. The defendant has denied that 150 trees of khair were cut by him from the suit land and has pleaded that before the felling order is obtained, an agreement in writing is entered into between the parties and the same is submitted to the Forest Department and then felling order is issued in favour of the contractor by the forest department but in the instant case there is no agreement in writing with respect to the alleged khair trees between the parties nor any felling order has been obtained by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant. It is also denied that the defendant has uprooted any khair tree from the suit land and the plaintiff has suffered any loss to the tune of Rs.2,25,000/-. The causing of damage to the crop in the suit land has also been denied.