MINERAL TRADERS & ENGINEERS Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 20.9.2013 passed in W.P (C) No.1044/2009, in and by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition declining to order for refund of the sale amount and giving liberty to the petitioner-appellant to file civil suit before a competent court for refund of the amount, if so desires.

(2.) The appellant is a partnership firm, which participated in auction of various scrap materials of Central Coalfields Limited (CCL) on 8.7.2008 and successfully purchased the scrap materials enumerated in Lot Nos.6/44 and 7/44 and the appellant paid Rs.2,10,743/- and Rs.9,00,000/- through bank drafts to the respondent-CCL. After receipt of the aforesaid amount, delivery advice was given on 12.7.2008. The respondent-CCL issued letter/delivery order dated 23.8.2008 in favour of the appellant and asked the appellant to take delivery of scrap materials within 30 days from the date of the delivery advice. The case of the appellant is that as per terms and conditions of e-auction, the delivery order was to be issued within 30 days from the date of 12.7.2008, i.e. should have been issued on or before 11.8.2008, but the delivery advice was given on 23.8.2008 to the appellant after 40 days without any reason for the delay of ten days. Further grievance of the appellant is that during the course of cutting materials, Mr.Upendra Singh, Store-In-Charge of Kathara Store, started threatening the persons of the appellant along with some unsocial elements for the illegal demand and anti-social elements started disturbing the appellant's persons and therefore, the appellant's persons were unable to work and the appellant also made a complaint to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bokaro and in that prevailing situation, the appellant had no option left than to stop the work at site. The appellant made representation on 25.10.2008 to the concerned authority stating the facts and requesting the respondents to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs.Rs.2,10,743/- and Rs.9,00,000/- with interest and other monetary loss caused to the appellant. The appellant also sent a reminder to the concerned authority on 3.11.2008. In reply to the above letter, the respondents gave a letter dated 11.11.2008 to the appellant granting extension of the period of delivery to the appellant even though no such prayer for extension of time was made by the appellant. According to the appellant, it again wrote a letter dated 18.11.2008, interalia, stating that the appellant did not ask for extension of time and there is no question of lifting the materials within the extended period and further requested the respondent-CCL to refund the amount to the appellant along with interest. The respondents again wrote letters to the appellant, vide letter dated 20.11.2008 and 2.12.2008, extending the period for lifting the materials in question. Being aggrieved by non-refund of the amount of Rs.2,10,743/- and Rs.9,00,000/-, the appellant filed W.P (C) No.1044/2009.

(3.) After extracting clause 10 of the terms and conditions of e-auction notice, learned Single Judge held that as per clause 10 of the terms and conditions of e-auction notice, if the materials purchased are not lifted within the time stipulated, the money paid by the buyer/bidder will automatically be forfeited and in view of clause 10 of the terms and conditions of e-auction, prima facie the petitioner is not entitled to get refund of the money deposited by it. In so far as the allegation against the Store-In-Charge of Kathara Store of CCL and threat given by some anti-social elements is concerned, learned Single Judge held that it is disputed question of fact and writ court cannot decide the disputed questions of fact and gave liberty to the appellant to file civil suit for refund of the amount.