(1.) THIS is plaintiffs' appeal against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil judge, Udaipur dated 8th of January, 1958, dismissing the plaintiffs' suit as being time barred.
(2.) THE facts of this case are not much in dispute. It is admitted between the parties that the forest of Thikana Madri in District Udaipur was leased out by the forest Department to the plaintiffs for the manufacture of 600 Handis of 'katha' (Catochu) at the rate of Rs. 15 per Handi. One of the conditions of the agreement which was signed between the parties on 27th November, 1947 was that the plaintiffs would complete the Theka work by the 30th of June, 1948 and if for certain unforeseen calamity the plaintiffs failed to complete their work, then it will be within the discretion of the department to renew the contract for the next term on the payment of 10 per cent over and above the amount stipulated in the contract. But for this purpose, it was necessary for the plaintiff to make an application by February 1948. According to the allegation, made by him in his plaint, the plaintiff made an application for renewal of the contract in the month of April, 1948 but the copy of that application has not been placed on record. Upto June, 1948, the plaintiff could prepare only 126 Handis. He made another application (Ex. A-3) on 28th september, 1948 requesting the authorities in the Forest Department to permit him to deposit the 10 per cent for the remaining 374 Handis, that is Rs. 561 and then to permit him to work the forest to complete the manufacture of 500 Handis for which the contract was given to him by the department. Thereupon, the statement of Khan Mohammad was recorded on 28th of September, 1948, wherein he admitted that an amount of Rs. 2,000 was outstanding against him of the last instalment to be paid by him under the agreement which he was prepared to pay with interest and further stated that there is a balance of 374 Handis in his agreement yet to be manufactured by him it appears from Ex. A-5 dated 29th of September. 1948 that the plaintiff Khan mohamad deposited Rs. 2,000 as the last instalment under the agreement along with Rs. 60 and 1 pie towards interest and also Rs. 561 as to 10 per cent money for the manufacture of 374 Handis. This amount was taken in deposit by the department in 'udrat'. The department however, did not care to extend the term of the agreement and did not permit the plaintiff to work the forest for the alleged balance of 374 Handis which he claimed to prepare therefrom. The Conservator of Forests, Udaipur range by his order dated 11th August, 1949, decided that the plaintiff had no right to work the forest and manufacture 'katha' from it and, therefore, he may be directed to withdraw the amount of Rs. 561 deposited as 10 per cent money over and above the contract. The plaintiff thereupon filed an appeal to the Chief Conservator of Forests who by his order dated 1st of February, 1960, dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff. Then a representation was made to the Government against the orders of the Conservator and Chief Conservator of Forests, but the plaintiffs failed to get any relief as the government dismissed the representation, vide its order dated 17th June, 1950 (Ex. A-13 ). Meanwhile, when the representation was pending before the Government, the plaintiffs started manufacturing 'katha' in the said forest. The exact date as to when they started this work in the forest is not known as it has not been mentioned by either party, but it is evident from the document Ex. 2 that the forestor of Gadwara seized 35 bags of the 'katha' manufactured by the plaintiff out of which 29 contained the dry katha' and six contained the wet 'katha' and 21 tins containing the liquid from which the katha was manufactured, that the katha was manufactured by the plaintiffs between 18th of March and 8th of May, 1950. The plaintiffs made several representations to the officers concerned of the Forest department and to the Government for releasing the said katha but the government first of all demanded from the plaintiffs royalty and lour times penalty and then asked the plaintiffs, vide the letter of the Government (Ex. 3) dated 25th january, 1954 to pay the market price of the katha and obtain the release thereof by the 27th of January 1954. The plaintiffs did not, however, agree to pay the market price. They served the State Government with a notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code.
(3.) THE grievance of the plaintiffs is that in spite of the fact that the katha was seized from their possession for which the plaintiffs did not agree to pay the royalty with penalty or the market price the Government did not take any proceedings under the Mewar Forest Act to get the Katha confiscated by refering the matter to the Magistrate having jurisdiction over the matter and therefore, the plaintiffs were left with no alternative but to file a suit against the Government for the return of the Katha seized from their possession, and in the alternative prayed that in case the specific property in the Katha was not available for return, they may be paid Rs. 17,525 as the price of the Katha seized by the State Government. They also claimed Rs. 12,400 as damages for not allowing the plaintiffs to work the forest in accordance with the term in the agreement dated 27th of November, 1947, and thus they have been deprived of their right to manufacture 214 Handis which they were entitled to prepare under the said agreement. Thus, a suit for the total amount of Rs. 29,626 was filed in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge Udaipur, on 17th of January, 1956.