http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: V.N.ENTERPRISES

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/08/1995

BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. MANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)

CITATION:  1995 SCALE  (5)1

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      The  respondent  herein  on  supply  of  goods  to  the appellants raised bills which were partly cleared. Since the balance was  substantial  and  the  appellants  a  statutory authority and  its representatives, the respondent moved the High Court  of Orissa  in a writ Petition for a direction so as to  recover the  balance outstanding.  The High  Court on entertainment of  the Writ  Petition came  to grips  of  the matter inclusive  of the  objection by the appellants that a civil  suit  was  the  appropriate  remedy.  Overruling  the objection, the  High Court  was moved  by the  fact that the writ petitioner  before it,  i.e.,the respondent herein, had undeniably supplied  the goods  at the rate quoted by it and that the  appellants had  after taking delivery utilised the said goods,  which factum was not disputed. It took the view that when  the facts were admitted, there was no justifiable reason on  the part  of the appellants not to pay the amount due to  the respondent when it had supplied the goods to the appellants. It  is, in  these circumstances,  that the  High Court ordered payment of the quoted price of goods supplied, allowing the  writ petition. That view of the High Court has been put to challenge here.      We do  not wish  either to comment on the step taken or the view  arrived at  by the High Court in these proceedings since we  find that  before the High Court the appellants in their counter  had pleaded that since they had been put to a loss of  Rs.43,16,400/- due  to high  quotations they  had a right to  withhold that  amount for  being paid-over  to the respondent. On  the other  hand, in  the  pleadings  of  the respondent herein,  before the  High Court,  as  also  here, claim is  laid that a sum of Rs.66,09,669.36 was outstanding and had been wrongly withheld. Interwining these two claims, it would  become apparent that a sum of about Rs. 23 lacs on the parties’  own showing  is not  disputed to be due to the respondent towards  its claims.  For this reason, we explain

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

away the  orders of  the High  Court by  ordering  that  the appellants shall  pay without  prejudice a sum of Rs.23 lacs to the  respondent towards part clearance of the outstanding bills and  sequally the  orders of  the High  Court shall be meant to confine to the payment of Rs.23 lacs, which is more or less  not disputed,  as payable.  Regarding  the  balance claim of  respondent, since it is disputed, it would have to move  the  civil  court  claiming  it  in  a  regular  suit. Necessarily accounting  will be resorted to in that suit and the sums  of moneys already paid to the respondent inclusive of the sum of Rs.23 lacs, as ordered to be paid today, would have to  be reckoned  in finalizing  the accounts. We, thus, modifyingly clarify  the High Court’s orders confining it to ordering  the  above  payment  of  Rs.23  lacs  leaving  all questions open  inclusive of  the claim  to interest  on all payments made  delayedly to  be  settled  before  the  civil court. The  appeal would  stand disposed  of accordingly. No costs.