https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174050 Sections 82 and 83 of the Forest Act, 1927 were treated as a special recovery code for unpaid forest produce money, so inconsistent contractual terms and the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 could not displace that statutory scheme. The Court held that the State's recovery had to follow the Forest Act mechanism, including the statutory first charge and sale process. It also held that a certificate proceeding could include only amounts then actually due; an instalment not yet fallen due when the requisition and certificate were issued was wrongly certified and had to be excluded. Recovery could proceed only after correction to reflect the sums lawfully payable. en-us Tue, 06 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:04:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174050 Sections 82 and 83 of the Forest Act, 1927 were treated as a special recovery code for unpaid forest produce money, so inconsistent contractual terms and the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 could not displace that statutory scheme. The Court held that the State's recovery had to follow the Forest Act mechanism, including the statutory first charge and sale process. It also held that a certificate proceeding could include only amounts then actually due; an instalment not yet fallen due when the requisition and certificate were issued was wrongly certified and had to be excluded. Recovery could proceed only after correction to reflect the sums lawfully payable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 06 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174050