IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 OP.No. 37714 of 2002(M) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.ESHAQUE, S/O.IBRAHIM,3/294,PULLOORI PAMBLE, NELLAM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN BOBY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, GOVERNMENT TIMBER DEPOT,NEDUNGAYAM , KARULAI,NILAMBUR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (ARREARS COLLECTION), KOZHIKODE. BY G.P. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN FOR R1&2 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NOS.63714/2002 & 5231/2003 IN OP NO.37714/2002 DISMISSED: 8.2.2008 SD/-(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT NO.319/97-98 DT.27.10.97 ISSUED BY R1. P2: TRUE COPY OF BILL DT.5.12.97 ISSUED BY R1. P3: TRUE COPY OF REPORT BEARING NO.272/97 DT.1.4.98 SUBMITTED BY R1 TO THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, TIMBER SALES DIVISION, KOZHIKODE. P4: TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE BEARING NO.DR-4/02-03 DT.15.5.2002 ISSUED BY R2 TO THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... O.P. No.37714 of 2002 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of loss suffered by the Government on account of petitioner's breach of contract in the purchase of teak wood from Forest Depot. Under the tender conditions the successful bidder should deposit the sale price and lift the material within the time granted. If there is failure on the part of the purchaser to pay the sale price and lift the material, the condition in the contract is for resale at the risk and cost of the contractor. The petitioner paid only security deposit and did not deposit balance sale price. The materials were thereafter sold and the amount demanded is stated to be differential price. The petitioner cannot have any objection against the demand because it is payable strictly in accordance with the terms of tender conditions accepted by the petitioner based on which he participated in the tender. However, counsel for the petitioner pointed out that petitioner does not have details about the actual sale price received on resale to verify whether Government suffered loss. If petitioner approaches the first respondent, then there will be direction to him to furnish the details 2 of sale price received on resale of timber. Subject to petitioner's entitlement for collecting such information, the O.P. is dismissed leaving freedom to the respondents to recover the amount if payment is not made. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms