B.L.Yadav - (1.) THIS is defendant's second appeal in a suit for recovery of Rs. 9444/- on the basis of a contract for planting trees. The suit was filed with the allegations that the tender of plaintiff was accepted by the defendant and thereafter work order dated 31st August 1984 was issued to the plaintiff for planting trees by 15th September 1982 which was subsequently extended till 16th October, 1984. He planted the trees and then submitted a bill duly verified by the junior engineer which was received in the office of defendant on 26th March, 1985. But the payments were not made. After several reminders on 26th March 1985 he was informed that the bill has been rejected. Thereupon a notice was served on the defendant by handing over the same to the then secretary as well as Vice Chairman of the Mandi Samiti but even then payment was not made hence the suit was filed.
(2.) THE suit was contested by the defendant appellants denying the plaint allegations but admitting that the tenders were accepted and work order was issued for planting 300 trees by 30th September 1984, out of which only 276 trees were planted but the veriety of the trees planted was not the same as agreed upon and ditches were not prepared according to the agreement and the suit was barred by time, as well as section 34 of U. P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Adhiniyam 1964, (for short the Adhiniyam). Trial court decreed the suit. Lower appellate court dismissed the appeal of the defendant appellants. Mr. BD. Mandhyan, learned counsel for the appellants urged that the suit was barred by section 34 of the Adhiniyam.
(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the appellant, exabundants cautela provisions of section 34 of the Adhiniyam are set out ; "34. Suit against the committee : (1) no suit shall be instituted against any committee, its Chairman, Vice- Chairman or any member, officer or servant thereof, for anything done, or purported to be done, in its or his official capacity until the expiration of two months from the date of service of a notice in writing, stating the cause of action, the name and place of abode of the plaintiff and the relief claimed. (2) The notice under sub-section (1) shall, (i) where it is a notice to the Committee, be delivered at its office on any working day or handed over to the Chairman, Vice Chairman of Secretary or shall be sent by registered post: and (ii) in every other case, be delivered to the person concerned, or seat by registered post. (3) No suit referred to in sub section (1) shall unless it is a suit for recovery of immovable property or for a declaration of title thereto, be instituted otherwise than within six months next after the accrual of the cause of action." Thus sub-section (2) of section 34 of the Adhiniyam makes it manifest that where a notice was required to be given to the Committee, it shall be delivered at its office on any working day or handed to the Chairman, Vice- Chairman or Secretary. In the present case as discussed in Para 5 of the judgment of the lower appellate court. It has been admitted by the defendants that the tender submitted by the plaintiff was acepted with an agreement, work was entrusted to the plaintiff, some trees were also planted, but the receipt of the notice by registered post was denied. Finding of the trial court is that the defendant appellants were properly served under the certificate of posting. The legislature appears to be conscious in providing that the notice may be handed to the Chairman, Vice- Chairman or the Secretary. The service of notice was a matter of procedure. The provision pertaining to procedure has to be interpreted so as to meet the ends of justice.;