Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Himachal Sorang Power Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Bisht – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contractor sues for unpaid construction work recovery. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments: fraud, limitation, non-joinder raised. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. fraud requires specific particulars in pleadings. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. limitation from final bill settlement period. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. award letter proves direct privity. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. adverse inference; plaintiff proved claim. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
ROMESH VERMA, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, dated 6.6.2018, as passed by the learned Additional District Judge (I), Shimla, whereby the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant for recovery of Rs. 25,00,000/- has been partly decreed and the respondent/plaintiff has been held entitled for recovery of Rs. 20,61,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 1.1.2010 till the date of filing of the suit and also future interest from the date of filing of the suit till the realization of entre amount.
2. The facts, which emerge in the case, are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a sui
Fraud allegations require specific pleadings with particulars under CPC Order VI Rule 4; vague pleas rejected. Limitation for work recovery runs from contract-specified final bill settlement date. Pr....
Contractors must adhere to measurement protocols outlined in contract agreements; failure by the other party to fulfill their obligations does not negate a claimant's right to recover amounts due.
The plaintiff must substantiate claims with clear evidence; failure to do so renders the trial court's decree arbitrary and subject to remand.
The court upheld that delayed payments must be compensated with interest, emphasizing that the appellants’ claims of irregularities were unsubstantiated and did not impede the contractors' right to r....
The lack of privity of contract and failure to establish a cause of action were central to the court's decision.
Civil Courts have jurisdiction to hear claims under construction contracts barred from arbitration, provided they arise within the limitation period set by specific contract conditions.
Concurrent findings upholding recovery of outstanding dues based on invoices, accounts, and defense admissions not interfered with in second appeal under Section 100 CPC absent perversity; suit withi....
The court upheld that a party may be compensated for work done despite absence of a written contract when the other party benefits, reinforcing principles of unjust enrichment under Section 70 of the....
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
