K.C. Agrawal, J. - (1.) This is a Special Appeal directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by Seth Banarsi Das, the appellant.
(2.) Seth Banarsidas obtained a lease of Shiva Prasad Banarsi Das Sugar Mills, Bijnor, for five years from the crushing season 1946-47 to 1950-51. During these years he was purchasing sugarcane from the second respondent which is the Cane Marketing Society Limited, Bijnor, a society registered under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act (briefly stated as the Society). These supplies were made by the said Society in accordance with the provisions of the United Provinces Sugar Factories Control Act 1938, and the Rules framed thereunder. Certain disputes, thereafter, arose between the appellant and the Society with regard to supplies of sugarcane made in the years 1948-49, 1949-50 and 1950-51. These disputes gave rise to two references one preferred by the appellant for compensation for the short supply of sugarcane and the other filed by the Society for Rs. 2,63,624/2/6. Both these references or claims had been filed before the Cane Commissioner under Rule 23 of the U.P. Sugar Factories Control Rules, 1938 for arbitration. The Cane Commissioner, thereafter, passed an order on July 26, 1951, for decision of the dispute. Thereafter, the appellant challenged the same by means of a writ petition prohibiting the Cane Commissioner from continuing the proceedings. As the facts relating to this petition are not material for our purposes, we not consider it necessary to mention them. Suffice to mention that by an order dated 11-12-1964, the Cane Commissioner appointed a new Board of Arbitrators consisting of two arbitrators. One of them was nominated by the appellant while the other was a nominee of the Society. In accordance with the provisions of sub-Rule (2) of Rule 23 of the United Provinces Sugar Factories Control Act the Cane Commissioner also nominated one Sri Ram Niwas as umpire to act as the President of the Board of Arbitrators.
(3.) The case which had been preferred by Seth Banarsi Das for Rs. 1,02,116/13/- was numbered as Suit No. 16 of 1950. The claim made by him was for compensation for short supply of sugarcane for the year 1949-50 on the ground that the Society did not supply the quantity of sugarcane which it had undertaken to supply under the contract. The Society filed a written statement denying the liability of payment of compensation to the appellant. It alleged that the appellant was bound under Rule 15 (1) of the Rules framed under the U.P. Sugar Factories Control Act, 1938, to estimate the yield of each grower and to submit the same to the Collector. The appellant did not submit the estimated yield to the Collector. Consequently he was not entitled to get any compensation for the year in question. Thereafter, the Society preferred a claim for commission against the appellant, this being claim No. 12 of 1951. The amount of commission claimed by the Society for a sum of Rs. 2,63,624/2/6 was for the crushing seasons 1948-49, 1949-50 and 1950-51 along with interest @71/2% per annum up to the date of payment. The appellant filed a written statement and refuted the liability of payment claimed by the Society. In the written statement, the appellant reiterated that he was entitled to get Rs. 1,02,116/13/- for the year 1949-50 as compensation on account of wilful short supply of sugarcane against the Society, and that he was entitled to a further sum of Rs. 1,07,028/11/9 as compensation for wilful short supply for the year 1950-51. He also denied the liability of making payment to the Society for the years 1948-49 and 1949-50 on the additional ground that he had already paid a sum of Rs. 22,628/13- in full and final satisfaction of the claim of the Society and, therefore, there was no further liability of making any payment by him to the Society.;