STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAM PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a State appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Ganganagar, on May 2, 1973, holding the State-defendant liable to pay to the plaintiff-respondent an amount of Rs. 13,115/- with an interest @ Rs. 6 00 per cent per annum, which according to the trial court comes to Rs. 1,329/ -. Since the defendent-State had paid during the pendency of the suit an amount of Rs. 10,782/-, the total amount of decree passed against the defendant-State remains to to be Rs. 3,662/ -.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to this appeal, are as follows - The plaintiff-respondent entered into a contract with the State Govt. to supply 9,76,000 bricks of the size of 9"x4-1/2"x2-3/4" @ Rs. 86/- per thousand bricks and a formal contract was executed by the perties, which is Ex A-1. The case of the plaintiff was that he supplied the bricks to the defendant-State and the same was accepted by the Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan Canal Project, Tilwara Sub-Division, who was incharge of the Canal Construction work. The State paid a sum of Rs. 70,800. 71 p. towards the price of the hricks supplied by the plaintiff, but the rest of the amount calculated at the specified rate, which comes to Rs. 13,115/-, was not paid by the State Government inspite of the facts that a notice under sec. 80, C. P. C. was given by the plaintiff to the defendant-State. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit claiming an amount of Rs. 13,115/- and interest on that amount @ Rs. 1 per cent per annum.

(3.) APART from this defect, I feel that the decision given by the Chief Engineer contained in Ex. 1 is binding on both the parties, though it may be a wrong decision. It is not as easy to say as has been argued before me that the directions contained in Ex. 1 were merely departmental directions, because I find that that matter was decided by the Chief Engineer on the dispute raised by the contractor contained in his notice under section 80, G. P. C.