Allowed

Kedia Scientific And Surgical v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC31 Jul 2012CWJC/13200/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ application regarding unpaid bills for medical materials supplied by the petitioner to a government hospital. The court directed the respondent to settle the bills within three months, arranging funds if necessary, with a penalty of 12% compound interest for default.

What did the court decide?

Directed to examine bills and ensure release of admissible amount within three months or pay 12% compound interest from own pocket.

Kedia Scientific And Surgical Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13200 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== 1. Kedia Scientific And Surgical, Office Situated At Hospital Road, Laheriasarai, Town & District- Darbhanga, Through Its Proprietor, Namely Shrawan Kr. Kedia, S/O Late Atmaram Kedia, Resident Of MohallaGullobara, P.S.- Town, District- Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Dept. Of Health, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Superintendent, Darbhanga Medical College And Hospital, Darbhanga, P.O.- D.M.C.H., P.S.- Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kalikant Jha, Adv. and Mr. Manish Jha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumari Amrita, GP-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 31-07-2012 As per the case of the petitioner, pursuant to a decision of the competent Committee and, under the orders of the Superintendent of Medical College, it supplied certain materials in the year 2001 and onwards. Thereafter, it submitted its bills. However, grievance is that amount of the bills has not been paid to the petitioner, although the supply is admitted and at one point of time the amount for payment was also withdrawn from the amount, but instead of paying the same to the petitioner, it was deposited in civil deposit account. It is submitted that thereafter the Superintendent repeatedly requesting the higher authorities for release of the amount for payment to the petitioner, but the same is not being done.

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.13200 of 2012 (2) dt.31-07-2012

¶5

2 / 3

¶6

It goes without saying that, if the petitioner has completed the work as per the contract agreement and to the satisfaction of the respondents, he is entitled for payment of his bills and the respondents have no authority to withhold the same indefinitely without any valid and cogent reasons. It may be made clear that, since petitioner claims to have done the work in terms of the agreement and/or under valid orders/authorization by the competent authorities, paucity of fund or non-allotment of fund also cannot and should not be an excuse for keeping his/its bills pending.

¶7

In the circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the concerned respondent, responsible for payment of the amount of bills of the petitioner, to examine his/its bills in the light of work done by him/it and ensure release of admissible amount of the bills to the petitioner positively within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if necessary, by arranging fund for the same, failing which, the said respondent shall be liable to pay an interest on the amount, at the rate of 12% compoundable yearly, from his own pocket. In case, the said respondent finds that the amount of bill or any part thereof is not payable to the petitioner, he shall communicate the same to the petitioner in specific terms,

¶8

Patna High Court CWJC No.13200 of 2012 (2) dt.31-07-2012

¶9

3 / 3

¶10

assigning reasons thereof, within that very period. In that event, petitioner shall be at liberty to seek his remedy in accordance with law before an appropriate forum and claim an adjudication in respect of his entitlement of the said amount with interest.

¶11

Arvind/-

¶12

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

Kedia Scientific And Surgical v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kedia Scientific And Surgical v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Narayan Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Kumar Divyom Verma @ Kumar Dib Vs the General Manager,Central Ba

Satyendra Kumar Singh Vs the United Commercial Bank and O

Ramashankar Singh Vs the State Bank of India

Manish Kumar Vs The Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.

Ram Shyam Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.