1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.06.2019

CORAM:

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

C.S.No. 127 of 2014

The Additional Director General (E)(SZ)

All India Radio & Doordarshan

Swamy Sivananda Salai,

Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

.. Plaintiff

Vs

M/s.Rishi Engineering Enterprises

(Represented by its Proprietor Shri Sathish Janga)

403, Tirumala Residency,

14-7, M.S.Nagar, Malkajgiri,

Secunderabad – 500 047.

.. Defendant

Prayer : Plaint under Order IV Rule 1 of the OS rules read with Order VII

Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, prays for decre and judgment:

a) directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff a sum of

Rs.1,58,39,000/-,

b) directing the defendant to pay the interest at the rate of 24% for

Rs.1,58,39,000/- from the date of plaint till the date of realization,

c) directing the defendant to pay the cost of the suit.

For Plaintiff

:

Mr.Venkataswamy Babu

For Defendant

:

set ex-parte

2

J U D G M E N T

Prayer

The suit has been filed by the plaintiff for directing the defendant to

pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.1,58,39,000/-, directing the defendant to pay

the interest at the rate of 24% for Rs.1,58,39,000/- from the date of plaint till

the date of realization and directing the defendant to pay the cost of the suit.

2.

The plaintiff is the Additional Director General, All India

Radio and Doordarshan, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chepauk, Chennai – 600

005 and defendant is M/s.Rishi Engineering Enterprises, having office at

403, Tirumala Residency, 14-7, M.S.Nagar, Malkajgiri, Secunderabad – 500

047.

a) Facts of the case :-

i) The plaintiff is an Organization functioning under the Government

of India and part of Prasar Bharathi. In the course of awarding of work

contract, the work pertaining to the Supply, Installation, Testing and

Commissioning of Strengthening of active mast at 100 Kilo watt medium

Transmitter, All Indian Radio, Port Blair was floated by the plaintiff from

3

Chennai in reference No. CE/SZ/SMT/41-E/METP/2008/5047-5050 dated

25/28-11-2008. The defendant was the lowest bidder and hence the contract

was awarded to the defendant. The work order was issued to the defendant

vide ref.No.CESZ/SMT/PRG/METP/2008-2009 on 23-01-2009. The time

period for completion of the contract was fixed as 6 months and it expired

on 22.07.2009. The defendant had not completed the work on time and

sought for extension of time and time was also extended by the plaintiff till

30.09.2009. Even after several reminders, the defendant had not

commenced the work at the site. Finally, on 23.03.2010, the defendant had

issued a letter saying that they have procured the materials and placed it in

the worksite. After commencing the work during the process of Tower

work defendant had damaged active mast/ resulted in breakdown of All

India Radio and its network at Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

ii) The defendant had accepted the damage caused to the Tower and

agreed to re-erect within five months vide letter dated 22.04.2010. The

plaintiff had appointed Mr.Jayakumar/Director Engineering for inspection

of the damage caused to the Tower and to submit report. The inspection

report was submitted to the plaintiff on 27.04.2010. The defendant accepted

4

liability and assured to re-erect the tower at their cost vide letter dated

29.06.2010. But the defendant failed to fulfill the undertaking given by

them. On 19.11.2010, the plaintiff had issued letter claiming damages for

the loss caused by the defendant, which were followed by many reminders.

iii) Though the defendant had admitted his liability but sought time

for re-erection. In the meanwhile, the Director General of AIR at New

Delhi gave an opinion that the defendant shall re-erect but the already

damaged mast was two level guy system and the one proposed to erect was

four level guy system, and hence, the additional expenditu