Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J. - (1.) The petitioner company is questioning the steps taken by the second respondent (Coal India Ltd.) in terms of the concluded contract between the parties. The second respondent deducted certain amount from the billed amount payable to the petitioner.
(2.) A contract was executed by and between the petitioner and the second respondent for supplying explosives to the third respondent, a subsidiary of the second respondent. The contract was to expire on February 28th, 2006. The new contract was executed on July 27th, 2006. During the period from March 1st, 2006 to July 26th, 2006 there was no formal contract in terms whereof the supply was to be made.
(3.) I am told that the second respondent extended the life of the old contract putting the condition that between the prices mentioned in the old contract and the new contract, the lower one would be applicable. A bank guarantee was given by the petitioner. After the new contract was executed, the second respondent invoked the bank guarantee claiming that the lower price fixed in the new contract was to apply to the supply made during the period in question. The petitioner disputed the position and took out this writ petition.;