SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Guj) 548

N.N.MATHUR
NARMADA CEMENT COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: HARSHA N.DEVANI, MANISH R.BHATT

N. N. MATHUR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner-Company is engaged in manufacture of cement. Respondent No. 2 Executive Engineer, Irrigation Mechanical Division No. 3, invited tender for supply of ordinary portland cement and possolone portland cement having I. S. I. mark to the extent of 1,00,000 M. T. as per tender notice No. 4 of 1990-91. In response to the said tender notice, the petitioner submitted tender which was accepted and in pursuance thereto an agreement in Form-D was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent No. 2. The petitioner supplied 40,621. 75 M. T. cement under the contract costing Rs. 6,76,27,702. 31 against which the respondent made payment of Rs. 6,52,38,900. 80 by various cheques. An amount of Rs. 23,88,801. 49 has been withheld by respondent No. 2 alleging that the said amount has been adjusted on various accounts which is evident from the letter dated 8-8-1994 annexed at Annexure b. The details of the withheld amount of rs. 23,88,801. 49 as pointed out in the aforesaid communication are as under : a) Recoveries towards short supply of cement. Rs. 10,131. 90 b) Recovery towards cost of levy cement of drainage division, Navsari Rs. 9,792. 71 c) Charges of










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top