STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. VAYA COPY MANUFACTURERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code is directed against judgment and decree dated 8.7.2002 passed by District Judge Udaipur in Civil Original Suit No. 148/1997 - Vaya Copy Manufactures & Stationers v. State & Anr.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,23,440/- against defendant-appellants stating inter-alia therein that the defendants invited tender for supply of stationery and other material and in response thereto the tender off respondent-plaintiff was accepted on 10.4.1996 being lowest one. The samples of stationery and other articles, which were to be supplied, were also submitted. After negotiations on 31.5.1996 and 19.6.1996, finally it was agreed that the plaintiff was to supply the stationery and other material as per the terms and conditions mentioned in Ex.2. Thus, the contract entered between the parties came into existence for supply of material desired by the defendant-appellants. There was delay in supplying the material but when the material was supplied, no objection was raised to that and the defendants utilised the material supplied. During the continuance of contract agreement, payments in regard to supply of material were also made. At the time of final bill in relation to first supply order, deduction was made from the cost of material @ 20% and regarding other work order deduction was made @ 30% of the cost of the material supplied. The case of the plaintiff-respondent is that as per the terms and conditions it was agreed between the parties that in case the supply of the material was not to the satisfaction of the defendant-appellants then after providing an opportunity to the plaintiff, the Collector (Literacy) Chittorgah, could pass order for the return of the material. In the instant case, the material was used and at no point of time any complaint was made that the material was not upto mark but without any rhyme and reason the deductions were made in an arbitrary manner. It was prayed that suit be decreed for the amount, which was required to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendants in pursuance to the supply of goods to the defendants.

(3.) The defendants in their written statement stated that the goods supplied were not upto the mark and further the supply was delayed. It is further case of the defendants that after examining the material supplied by the plaintiff defendants came to the conclusion that it was not as per the specifications and therefore the deductions were made from the cost of the material supplied by the plaintiff. It was prayed that the suit be dismissed.