PATNA, India, May 15 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on April 10:

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present First Appeal has been preferred by the appellants under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') assailing the judgment and decree dated 19.11.2003 passed by the learned Sub JudgeVI, Patna (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court') in Money Suit No. 134 of 1999, whereby and whereunder the suit instituted by the plaintiffs (appellants) for recovery of Rs. 5,00,009/- was dismissed with contest but without cost with liberty to the plaintiff to re-agitate his claim before the higher authority of the defendants i.e., the department concerned by placing relevant papers to this context, if the plaintiff so desires.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties where required shall be referred to in terms of their status before the learned Trial Court.

4. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that they were engaged in the business of supply of electrical and mechanical materials and, in pursuant to purchase orders issued by the defendants-authorities of the Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, supplied the required materials as per the terms and specifications of the agreement. The plaintiffs asserted that the materials so supplied were duly received by the concerned divisions and utilized in departmental works without any immediate objection. According to them, despite completion of supply and fulfillment of contractual obligations on their part, the defendants failed to release payment of the outstanding dues. It is asserted that the entire suit amount which is to be realised by the plaintiff against the defendants are duly mentioned in Schedule-I of the plaint having explained as the principal amount for the goods supplies to the defendants amounting to Rs 204922/- and the interest @24% per annum since supply upto filing of the suit amounting to Rs 295087/-. However, even the repeated requests and representations by the plaintiff, did not yield them any result, compelling the plaintiff to institute Money Suit No. 134 of 1999 for recovery of Rs. 5,00,009/- in toto including the interest accrued, in addition to the other consequential reliefs.

5. The defendants appeared and filed their written statement contesting the suit, denying the material allegations made in the plaint by the plaintiff. It was stated, inter alia, that the plaintiff had not supplied the materials strictly in accordance with the prescribed specifications and contractual terms. It was further stated that upon inspection and examination by the departmental authorities, the materials were found to be substandard and not conforming to the required technical standards.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MSM0NCMyMDA0IzEjTg==-pxwTA6HAuSo=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.