P.D. VERMA AND CO. Vs. LAXMI BUILDERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned judgment and decree suit of the appellant -plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 6,45,300/ - against the respondent -defendant has been dismissed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, appellant has preferred this appeal.

(2.) APPELLANT alleged in the plaint that appellant was sole proprietorship firm of Sh. Prabhu Dayal Verma and was engaged in carrying out work of fixing pipes and sanitary installations on job work basis. In the month of April, 1991 respondent awarded contract to appellant for fixing of water supply pipes and sanitary installations in the residential flats constructed by Indraprastha Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. Delhi. Appellant was given a room for storing the tools and equipments. Appellant carried out work in the said society pursuant to the work order and raised running bills from time to time. On 5th June, 1991 appellant submitted first running bill amounting to Rs. 63,000/ - against which respondent paid only Rs. 59,025/ -. Thereafter, a formal contract was reduced in writing on 22nd June, 1991. On 6th August, 1991 appellant raised second running bill for Rs. 64,830/ - against which Rs. 64,243/ - was paid. Third running bill for Rs. 40,054.50 was raised on 7th September, 1991, against which Rs. 39,527/ - was paid. Fourth running bill dated 22nd September, 1991 for a sum of Rs. 81,495/ - was raised by the appellant, against which Rs. 79,052/ - was paid. On 5th January, 1992 fifth running bill for a sum of Rs. 1,46,925/ - was raised, against which respondent paid Rs. 99,108/ -. Against sixth running bill dated 10th February, 1992 of Rs. 1,50,838.50, respondent paid only Rs. 74,160/ -. Against seventh running bill dated 7th March, 1992 for Rs. 1,46,437.50, respondent paid only Rs. 84,048/ -. Similarly, against eighth and ninth running bills dated 1st August, 1992 and 25th September, 1992 for Rs. 2,63,989.50 and Rs. 5,63,946.50, respondent paid only Rs. 98,880/ - and Rs. 1,83,917/ -, respectively. After completion of work, appellant raised final bill dated 29th May, 1993 for Rs. 6,36,349.50, against which only Rs. 88,992/ - was paid on 27th March, 1993. All the payments were made through cheques. Respondent did not pay remaining amount of Rs. 5,47,357.50, inasmuch as did not allow the appellant to remove his equipments and other materials valuing Rs. 10,500/ - which were lying in the store room. Since dues of the appellant were not paid despite legal notice dated 20th September, 1993, hence the suit for recovery of Rs. 6,45,300 which amount included interest @12% per annum from 29th May, 1993 to 24th April, 1995.

(3.) RESPONDENT further alleged that another total sum of Rs. 1,24,000/ - was paid to appellant in cash between 1st May, 1991 to 29th July, 1992 so as to enable the appellant to make day -to -day payment to his labour at the spot. In fact appellant had received Rs. 9,80,000/ - for sanitary works executed by it for which no bills were submitted with the respondent. As per the respondent, appellant was not entitled to any amount and suit was liable to be dismissed.