INPLAN Vs. BANARAS MANUFACTURERS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 34,71,803/ - against the defendant. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had invited tenders at Delhi for the construction of a factory at Plot No. 36, Sector -31, Greater Noida. In response to the invitation of the tender, the plaintiff submitted tender from its registered office at Delhi to the office of the defendant at Delhi vide letter dated 22nd December, 2000. The tender of the plaintiff was accepted who was awarded the work by the defendant vide Work Or.dated 12th May, 2001. After awarding of the work, the plaintiff had made all the arrangements and kept on submitting the bills from time to time, the details of which are mentioned in paras 5 to 8 of the plaint.

(2.) IT is alleged that the defendant committed a breach of the contract by not making the payment as per the schedule given in Annexure -I to the Work Or.dated 12th May, 2001. The said information was given to the defendant by letter dated 12th July, 2001. It was informed by the plaintiff to the defendant that because of delay in payments, the progress of the work was suffering which would further result into losses by way of additional expenses to the plaintiff due to prolongation on account of increased rates, overhead expenses, wastage of labour and materials. Thus, the defendant was called upon to pay the amounts of the pending bills with interest @ 21% per annum to mitigate the losses and to enable the plaintiff to complete the work at the amended rates. Despite of repeated reminders, the defendant neither improved the supply of materials nor made the payment for the work done. Various correspondences were exchanged between the parties in this regard where the plaintiff was insisting for balance amount and the defendant did not make the payments as asked by the plaintiff. Therefore, the suit for recovery was filed.

(3.) FIRSTLY , I shall take up the application being I.A. No. 6741/2013 filed by the defendant under Or.VI R.17 CPC for amendment in the written statement seeking to amend para 31 -B and the prayer clause of the written statement in terms of para 14 of the application. It has been stated that the plot in question had to be constructed by 31st August, 2001. However, subsequent extensions had been granted to the defendant by Greater Noida Authority. The said Authority vide its letter No. Udyog/2013/648, dated 8th February, 2013 granted post -facto sanction for extension of construction of the plot upto 31st December, 2004 subject to deposit of a sum of Rs. 11.85 lacs. The defendant by way of an amendment in the written statement in effect seeks to include an amount of penalty of Rs. 11.85 lacs that it allegedly had to pay to Greater Noida Authority in the total amount of loss incurred by the defendant because of the plaintiff. It has been stated that due to non -cooperative and callous attitude of the plaintiff, the construction of the plot in question could not be completed in time and could be completed only by September, 2004 for which the said penalty amount had to be paid by the defendant. Now, the total amount that the defendant claims against the plaintiff is Rs. 81.89 lacs.