Back
A. ABHISHEK REDDY
Venus Mediscience Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
A. Abhishek Reddy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s);—
“(a) For quashing the order dated contained in memo no. 238(12) dated 05.03.2016 issued by the respondent no. 4 whereby the claim of the petitioner company contained in the representation dated 13.07.2015 submitted in pursuant to the order dated 29.06.2015 passed by this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 7879/2015 has been rejected.
(b) For a direction to the respondent nos. 6 & 7 to make the payments in regard to the supply of the medicines made in execution of purchase orders contained in letter no. 504 dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 505, dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 506 dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 507 dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 511 dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 594, dated 16.03.2015 as well as another purchase order contained in letter no. 153 dated 03.03.2015 issued by the respondent no. 6.
(c) For a direction to the respondent no. 6 to ensure receiving of supply of remaining part of medicines made by the petitioner in pursuant to the purchase order issued by the respondent no. 6 contained in letter no. 504, dated 02.03.2015, letter no. 505, dated 02.03.2015,
A supplier is entitled to payment for goods supplied under a valid work order, regardless of procedural lapses by the issuing authority.
The court upheld the respondent's right to withhold payments due to the petitioner's failure to fulfill supply obligations, emphasizing that contractual disputes should be resolved through appropriat....
The court ruled that without proof of compliance with the supply order's conditions, the Petitioner's claims for payment could not be upheld, allowing for resolution in civil court.
The principles of natural justice require that a party be given a fair opportunity to defend itself against allegations made against it. This includes the right to receive a copy of the evidence agai....
The impugned order violated principles of natural justice and tender conditions, leading to its setting aside by the court.
Judicial review under Article 226 is not appropriate for resolving contractual disputes, which should be addressed in civil courts.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
