M/S Madani Dawakhana, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Dec 2025WP/25432/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court; Suraj Govindaraj J; writ petition mandamus; payment of admitted pending bills; AYUSH E-Tender drug supply; invoices unpaid; interest on security deposit; representation dated 21.12.2023 Annexure-Q consideration; direction to pass orders within 30 days; no opinion on entitlement; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; Rs.96,70,161; Rs.15,22,695; 18% interest.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; respondents directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.12.2023 at Annexure-Q and pass necessary orders within 30 days from receipt of a copy of the order; the Court expressly expressed no opinion on the petitioner's entitlement. Monetary reliefs of Rs.96,70,161/- and Rs.15,22,695/- were claimed but not adjudicated or awarded. ¶¶40

M/S Madani Dawakhana, Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 2 and 3 ought to be directed by writ of mandamus to release amounts payable under the admitted pending bills, claimed at Rs.96,70,161/- calculated upto 26.09.2023, together with 18% interest from 26.09.2023 till payment. +1 more

¶¶30

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is allowed.

¶¶39

Key takeaways

The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.12.2023 (Annexure-Q) and pass necessary orders within 30 days from receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶¶40
The Court expressly clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner to the claimed amounts.ratio¶¶41
Observation that whenever invoices are submitted, the tender acceptance authority and/or employer is required to make payment of the due amounts thereon in terms of the work order/contract; stated while declining to adjudicate entitlement, hence not necessary to the disposition.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India — M/s. Madani Dawakhana, a drug supplier under an E-Tender issued on 02.11.2015 to the Directorate of AYUSH, sought mandamus directing respondents 2 and 3 to release admitted pending bill amounts of Rs.96,70,161/- (upto 26.09.2023) with 18% interest and interest on security deposits of Rs.15,22,695/- (till 21.12.2023) with further interest at 18% p.a., its representation dated 21.12.2023 (Annexure-Q) having gone unconsidered. Held: observing that the tender acceptance authority/employer is required to pay due amounts on invoices in terms of the work order/contract, but without expressing any opinion on entitlement, the Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to consider the representation dated 21.12.2023 and pass necessary orders within 30 days.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:53087 WP No. 25432 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 25432 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S. MADANI DAWAKHANA, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 71, GROUND FLOOR, NEW MARKET ROAD, OPP. CHARMINAR, MASJID, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR/ PROPRIETARY CONCERN, SRI. MOHAMMED YUSUFF SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, SON OF LATE M.A. MAJEED.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, (AYUSH) VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER (EARLIER DIRECTOR) TENDRE INVITING AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE OF AYUSH, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DHANAVANTRI ROAD, BENGALURU - 09.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:53087 WP No. 25432 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PHARMACY) GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PHARMACY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, ASHOKA PILLAR, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECT THE R2 AND 3 TO RELEASE AMOUNTS PAYABLE UNDER THE ADMITTED PENDING BILLS WITH INTEREST TO THE TUNE OF RS. 96,70,161-00 CALCULATED UPTO 26/09/2023 TOGETHER WITH 18 PERCENT INTEREST CALCULATED FROM 26/09/2023 TILL THE DUES ARE ACTUALLY PAID, IMMEDIATELY TO THE PETITIONER AS INDICATED IN THE DOCUMENT PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNX-Q TO THIS WP WITHIN A LIMITED TIME FRAME, PREFERABLY WITH 1 MONTH AS THE MATTER IS EXTREMELY URGENT IN NATURE AND ETC.,

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶27

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:53087 WP No. 25432 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or directions of like nature directing the respondents 2 and 3 to release amounts payable under the admitted pending bills with interest to the tune of Rs.96,70,161-00 calculated upto 26.09.2023 together with 18% interest calculated from 26.09.2023 till the dues are actually paid, immediately to the petitioner as indicated in the document produced and marked as ANNEXURE 'Q' to this writ petition within a limited time frame, preferably with 1 month as the matter is extremely urgent in nature.

¶31

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or directions of like nature directing the respondents 2 and 3 to release the interest payable on the security deposit amounts to the tune of Rs.15,22,695-00 calculated till 21.12.2023 and further interest at 18% per annum from 21.12.2023 till the same is actually paid as indicated in the document produced and marked ANNEXURE 'Q' to this writ petition within a limited time frame, preferably with 1 month as the matter is extremely urgent in nature.

¶32

(c) Grant such other orders or reliefs as this honourable court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances involved in the case.

¶33

The petitioner contends that the petitioner has supplied the drugs as requested in terms of the E-Tender issued on 02.11.2015 and raised his invoices, which have not been considered and payments made. In that background the petitioner has submitted a representation on 21.12.2023 in terms of Annexure-Q, which has also not been considered. It is in that background, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:53087 WP No. 25432 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Whenever any invoices are submitted, it is required for the tender acceptance authority and/or the employer to make payment of the due amounts thereon in terms of the work order/contract entered into. In the present matter, the bills not having been processed, a representation was submitted on 21.12.2023, which has also not been considered.

¶37

In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i) Writ petition is allowed .

¶40

ii) The respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 21.12.2023 at Annexure-Q and pass necessary orders within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶41

iii) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner.

¶42

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶43

GJM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

M/S Madani Dawakhana, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Madani Dawakhana, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. K K Enterprises Vs the Additional District Election Officer (South)

M/S Janapriya Engineers Syndicate Pvt. Ltd., Vs Mr. Krishna Gopal Vijayvargiya

M/S. K. K. Enterprises Vs the Additional District Election Officer

Akhand Pratap Singh Manager (Electronics) Vs Member (Ans)

Slv Enterprises Vs State of Karnataka

City Families Association (R) Vs the District Registrar of Societies