9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . A-4 and A-5 the sum of around Rs. 10 lakhs was in consonance with the agreement of the parties. Thereafter Company was directed to deposit Rs. 8 lakhs with direction to the petitioner to file a suit. The company aggrieved by the said order, prefered an appeal. By order dated 3-4-1998 the Division Bench of this Court modified the order to the extent that the company was directed to deposit Rs. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the petitioner has over-billed the company and also that the work was not to specification. The petitioner had served statutory notice on the company dated 10-9-1996. The work had been completed by November, 1995. In pararaph 2 it was averred that the work was done to the satisfaction of the company and invoices had been raised which are received and accepted. In paragraph 4, it is set out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome amount is refundable. In response to paragraph 5, the only contention is that the invoices were valid and figures were inflated. A reply has been filed to the petition by Shri Dinesh Nandwana and a rejoinder by Shri Ram P. Awasthi on behalf of the petitioner. After perusing the statutory notice, the reply thereto and the averments in the reply and the rejoinder, it is clear that at no point of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se defences are neither bona fide nor credible. However, considering the facts and circumstances, the following order :- 3. Company to deposit within eight weeks a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs and furnish bank guarantee in an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs to be kept alive in terms of the directions to be given hereinafter. On such deposit and furnishing bank guarantee. The company petition to stand dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
