- (1.) THIS regular second appeal has been preferred by M/s Vodafone Essar South Limited, one of the defendants, who remained unsuccessful in both the Courts below, against the judgment and decree dated 12.04.2012 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), S.A.S. Nagar whereby suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery has been partly decreed, as well as, against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, S.A.S. Nagar whereby appeal preferred by the appellant -defendant has been dismissed. For convenience sake, hereinafter parties will be referred to as they were arrayed in the Court of first instance.
(2.) THE detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, brief facts relevant for disposal of this regular second appeal are that plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 4,84,624/ - (Rs.2,35,309/ - as principal amount, Rs.1,74,235/ - as interest and Rs.75,000/ - as damages) for the work done by the plaintiff as contract of work between the parties. It is alleged that the contract was between defendant nos. 1 and 2, who have transferred all the assets and liabilities to defendant nos. 3 and 4, resultantly, they are responsible for the liabilities of defendant nos. 1 and 2. The plaintiff executed works for defendant nos. 1 and 2 as per work order dated 19.10.2004 and work order dated 17.03.2004 and raised the bills for payment and received part payment in pursuance thereof from the defendants from time to time. During the reconciliation of the accounts of the plaintiff with account books, an amount of Rs.2,09,000/ - was found payable by the defendants to the plaintiff. The same was conveyed by the plaintiff vide letter dated 02.08.2006. It is the case of the plaintiff that he had completed the work of the defendants as per work order / contract and handed over to its Mohali office before installation of steel tower antennas and electrical fittings. Electrical connections were also released to the defendants after getting completion certificate from the Chief Engineer Inspector Punjab long time back. The plaintiff has claimed the following amounts: JUDGEMENT_577_LAWS(P&H)2_20141.htm
(3.) IT was also averred in the plaint that plaintiff in pursuance of letter dated 02.08.2006 written by defendant no.2, wrote a letter dated 10.08.2006 furnished para -wise reply to the issues raised in the letter dated 02.11.2006 of defendant nos. 1 and 2 and clarified the difference of Rs.3214/ - payable to him. The plaintiff written may letters to defendant nos. 1 and 2 and ultimately issued legal notice for releasing the payment to him, but to no avail. Defendants failed to pay the aforesaid amount. Hence, suit was filed. Upon notice, defendants appeared and filed written statement contending that the plaintiff has not approached the Court with clean hands. The Contractor was to deliver work as per schedule and was to provide the same to the satisfaction of the defendants. However, the plaintiff failed to finish the work as per schedule and there were many deficiencies, which were conveyed to the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to remove the same. Since the RTT sites are crucial as the same involve danger to public life, defendant had to engage another contractor, namely, Samriti Engineers Private Limited for execution of same work at Main Bazar Moga. Defendants had cancelled the work order in favour of the plaintiff as per the stipulated terms because the services rendered by the plaintiff were not upto the mark and satisfaction of the defendants. The suit is barred by limitation and is also not maintainable in the present form.;