Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1990 DIGILAW 167 (ALL)

Saidpur Matsyajivi Sahkarl Samiti Ltd. , Saidpur Ghazipur v. State of U. P

1990-02-09

D.S.SINHA, S.K.DHAON

body1990
JUDGMENT S. K. Dhaon, J. - It is an admitted position that the petitioner has committed a breach of the agreement dated 26th March, 1987 in so far as it has failed to pay the fifth instalment within the time specified. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that the respondents may be directed not to interfere with the rights of the petitioner to fish in Gujartal Tank (District, Jaunpur) under the said agreement. The further prayer is that Clause (8) of the agreement may be severed from the rest of the provisions of the agreement as the same is unconstitutional and also hit by Section 23 of the Contract Act. 2. We are not prepared to accept the contention of the learned counsel. The agreement came into force on the basis of an open auction wherein the petitioner participated after due notice. The petitioner was not compelled to enter into an agreement by pressure There were other competitors who had their bid been accepted they too would have been required to enter into agreement accepting the terms of paragraph 8 of the agreement. 3. Learned Standing Counsel has been heard in opposition of this petition. In view of the order, we propose to pass, we do not consider it necessary to grant time to the standing counsel for filing a counter affidavit. With the consent of the learned counsel, we proceed to dispose of this petition finally. 4. The fourth instalment has already been paid by the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner has already deposited the necessary amount to cover the period till 1991. In these circumstances, we feel that it will be harsh if the agreement in question is allowed to be terminated on the ground that the petitioner committed a default. We, therefore, direct that if the petitioner pays the last instalment within a period of three months from today, the respondents shall adhere to the terms of the aforementioned agreement dated 26th March, 1987 and will not interfere with the rights of the petitioner to fish in the tank on the mere ground that it committed a default in the payment of the last instalment, viz., the fifth instalment. We make it clear that, in the meantime, the petitioner shall be allowed to fish on the basis of the agreement. We make it clear that, in the meantime, the petitioner shall be allowed to fish on the basis of the agreement. We further make it clear that if the petitioner, does not pay the last instalment, within the time specified by us, the respondents will have a right to prevent the petitioner from fishing. 5. With these directions, the petition is disposed of finally. 6. A certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of requisite charges within a week.