Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 72
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J
A.K. SINGLA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS – Respondent
Mr. Aviral Setia, Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana, Mr. Arvind Seth
The court awarded interest at 6% per annum on delayed payment due to a seven-year delay, emphasizing timely disbursement of dues.
Headnote:(A) Interest Act, 1978 - Section 34 - Delay in payment of outstanding bills - Petitioner sought release of Rs.83,37,138/- with interest at 24% p.a. for services rendered - Respondents acknowledged the principal amount was released but contested entitlement to interest - Court awarded interest at 6% p.a. due to seven-year delay in payment. (Paras 1, 5, 6)
(B) Contempt of Court - Non-compliance with court orders - Court noted attempts by respondents to circumvent previous orders regarding salary disbursement - Contempt proceedings initiated against officials for failure to comply with directives. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner provided JCBs and tractor trolleys for demolition work and sought payment for outstanding bills. Despite the principal amount being released, there was a significant delay in payment, prompting the petitioner to seek interest.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the delay warranted the award of interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition until actual payment. The respondents were directed to release the interest amount within two months.
Issues: The main issues included the entitlement of the petitioner to interest on delayed payment and the respondents' compliance with previous court orders regarding salary disbursement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the delay in payment justified the award of interest, emphasizing the importance of timely disbursement of dues. Additionally, the court initiated contempt proceedings against officials for non-compliance with its orders.
Result: Petition stands allowed.
Learned Senior Counsel a contends that the amount in question has already been released in favour of the petitioner, however, there is a delay of nearly seven years in releasing the said amount. He thus prays for int Learned Counsel for the respondents do submits that the petitioner and clause in the agreement Heard.
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH A.K. SINGLA VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.
**** Mr. Naresh Markanda, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Aviral Setia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Arvind Seth, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.
**** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition is for directing release the amount of outstanding bills amounting to Rs.83,37,138/ interest @ 24% p.a. on account of providing JCBs and tractor trolleys for demolition work and removal of garbage by the petitioner.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the amount in question has already been released in favour of the petitioner, however, there is a delay of nearly seven years in releasing the said . He thus prays for interest on the delayed payment.
Learned Counsel for the respondents do that the principal amount has already been released in favour of the petitioner and that he is not entitled for any interest whatsoeve agreement for interest.Heard.
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP-29356-2017 Date of Decision: 10.07.2024 ... Petitioner ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.
Sr. Advocate with for the petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana.
Prayer in the present petition is for directing the respondents to release the amount of outstanding bills amounting to Rs.83,37,138/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. on account of providing JCBs and tractor trolleys for demolition work and removal of garbage by the petitioner. ppearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the amount in question has already been released in favour of the petitioner, however, there is a delay of nearly seven years in releasing the said erest on the delayed payment.
Learned Counsel for the respondents does not dispute the same and principal amount has already been released in favour of the he is not entitled for any interest whatsoever as there was 2017 10.07.2024 ... Petitioner ... Respondents the respondents to alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. on account of providing JCBs and tractor trolleys for ppearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the amount in question has already been released in favour of the petitioner, however, there is a delay of nearly seven years in releasing the said and principal amount has already been released in favour of the no 1 of 3 CWP-29356-2017 Since the factual matrix is not disputed by either side and undisputedly question, I deem it appropriate to award interest @ 6% per annum on the delayed payment from the date of disbursement be released in favour of the petitioner within a period of two months of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
Petition stands allowed accordingly.
A 05.12.2022 directing not to Sharma, Superintending Engineer, HUDA Circle, Karnal, respondent No.4 Dharamveer Mehla, Executive Enginee respondent No.5 salaries of the given by the respondents in this regard is that the salaries have not been released from the office of HUDA but from the substantive posts which they were otherwise holding. I find that the aforesaid stand of the respondents is an attempt at over-reaching an salaries of the abovementioned officials specifically withheld by this Court and that such an order cannot be naught by a mere change in the Before proceeding further in the matter, let a contem
