Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. SUPEHIA, L.S. PIRZADA
Innova Captab Limited – Appellant
Versus
Gujarat Medical Service Corporation Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks payment for invoiced amounts. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner argues illegal deductions by corporation. (Para 5 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court notes actions impacting payments lacked notice. (Para 18) |
| 4. recovery actions violated principles of natural justice. (Para 20 , 22) |
| 5. existence of arbitration clause does not bar writ petition. (Para 21 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. court directs payment of outstanding amounts with interest. (Para 26) |
JUDGMENT :
A.S. SUPEHIA, J.
1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner-Company, in Special Civil Application No.9917 of 2025, has sought for the following reliefs:
“A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this application;
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent no.1 to pay the petitioner, the full amount of Rs. 29,32,349/- towards clearance of invoices along with the interest at the rate of 18% in the interest of justice;
C. Pending admission and final hearing of the petition, Your Lordships may direct the respondent no.1 to pay the total outstanding amount of Rs.29,32,349/- along with the interest as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice;
D. Pending a
The court ruled that the respondent's unilateral deductions from payments violated principles of natural justice, requiring adherence to contract clauses and valid justification for any recovery acti....
The court reaffirmed that deductions from contracts must adhere to principles of natural justice, requiring prior notification and justification for any recovery actions.
Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot adjudicate disputes arising from contracts or address complex questions of fact needing evidence.
The court upheld that a party must substantiate any claims under an arbitration agreement with credible evidence; failure to do so results in rejection of claims under the risk and expense clause.
The court established that communications regarding outstanding dues do not equate to recovery orders, especially when a civil suit on the same matter is pending.
Unilateral deductions from contractual payments without notice violate principles of natural justice and are illegal under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The court emphasized the importance of fulfilling payment obligations in a contract and upheld the principle that breach of payment obligations justifies refusal to make further deliveries.
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
