P.K. Saikia, J. -- This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 01.06.2010, passed by Sr. Civil Judge, Aizawl, Mizoram in Money Suit No. 5/2006 decreeing the suit enabling the plaintiff to recover Rs. 13, 58,640/- only from the defendants therein with the interest rate of 10% per annum from the date of submitting the bill by the plaintiff till the realization of entire decreetal amount.

2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order, the defendants, as being appellants, preferred this appeal on the grounds, cited in the Memo of appeal.

3. The brief facts, as stated in the plaint in M.S.No. 5/2006, and which are necessary for disposal of this present appeal, are that respondent, herein, is the owner of a printing press and same was ran under the name and style of Milan Press, Zodin Square, Aizawl. He, as plaintiff, preferred the Money Suit No. 5/2006 alleging that he received a work order from defendant No. 3 requiring him to print Electoral Rolls to be used in connection with general election to the Village Councils, scheduled to be held 2002.

4. In the work order, aforesaid, it was stated that the work, so offered, was to be executed at the rate approved by Printing and Stationery Department. Govt. of Mizoram. Further, the Electoral Rolls were to be ready by 31st August, 2002 and the bill in respect of work, so entrusted to the plaintiff and others, were to be submitted to defendant No. 3 in triplicate within the stipulated time. The plaintiff completed the printing of the V/C Electoral rolls on 18.10.2002.

5. The plaintiff, thereafter, prepared the bill in triplicate and submitted the same to the respondent No. 3 claiming an amount to the tune of Rs. 28, 51,695/- only as being his dues for carrying out the work, entrusted to him through work order dated 09.07.2002. Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs. 14, 92,985/- was paid to the plaintiff. But the remaining amount was not paid to him despite the defendants were requested times without numbers.

6. On the request of plaintiff, the defendant No. 3, however, wrote a letter to the defendant No. 6 vide letter No. B. 12019/33/2000- DTE(LAD) Vol-III dated 17.3.2003 (Ext-P-9) requesting him to provide additional fund amounting to Rs. 13,58,640/- to satisfy the bills, submitted by the plaintiff in connection with preparation with Electoral Rolls, aforementioned . In the said letter, the defendant No. 3 clearly acknowledged that respondent No. 4 owed the plaintiff a sum to the tune of Rs. 13, 58,640/-.

7. In the same letter, the defendant No. 3 has also stated “the rate reflected in the enclosed bill are examined and found it to be tallying with the existing printing rates”. In reply to the said letter, defendant No. 6 wrote his letter No. B. 14016/7/02-LAD/VC dated Aizawl, 24th Nov, 2003 directing respondent No. 3 to meet the expenses incurred in connection with preparation of Electoral Rolls 2002 within the existing provision by adjusting the claim of plaintiff from some other heads.

8. Once again, defendant No. 3 wrote a letter, vide letter No. B. 12019/33/2000-DTE(LAD)Vol-III dated 19.8.2004 to defendant No. 6 asking him to provide the former additional fund to meet the printing expenses claimed by the plaintiff. Once again, vide his letter No. B.14016/7/02-LAD/VC dated 16th Sept, 2004 (Ext-P-11), the defendant No. 6 advised the defendant No. 3 to meet the printing expenses “by the way of adjustment within the budgetary allocations”.

9. Despite the directions, so given by the Govt. of Mizoram, in the form of the defendant. 6, from time to time, the defendant No. 3 did not pay the plaintiff his dues which stood at Rs. 13,58,640/- The plaintiff, therefore, served on all the state defendants the notice under Section 80 CPC requesting them to clear his dues within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the same.

10. In the notice under Section 80 CPC, it was also stated that in the event of their failure to pay his dues, the pl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document