9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agarwal For the Respondent : R.K. Shukla, Sr. S.C., P.K. Tripathi, R.C.Shukla ORDER 1. Heard Sri Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.K. Tripathi, Advocate, for respondents. 2. Sri Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for petitioner, at the outset, stated that Prayer (i) has rendered infructuous by efflux of time. 3. With respect to Prayer (ii), he could not dispute that it re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is for construction of a public utility and it has been awarded by a statutory body. A statute may expressly or impliedly confer power on a statutory body to enter into contracts in order to enable it to discharge its functions. Disputes arising out of the terms of such contracts or alleged breaches have to be settled by the ordinary principles of law of contract. The fact that one of the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ution. The Court further said: "That is a matter for adjudication by a civil court or in arbitration if provided for in the contract. Whether any amount is due and if so, how much and refusal of the appellant to pay it is justified or not, are not the matters which could have been agitated and decided in a writ petition." 5. Following the above authorities, a Division Bench of this Court in M/S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature which pertains to alleged non-payment of dues under a contract for supply of goods, it would neither be prudent nor judicious for this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to grant relief, which is in substance, is a prayer for a money decree. These matters, it must be emphasized, are not those relating to statutory contracts but are purely non-statut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ietor Vs. State of U.P. and others (Misc. Bench No. 3472 of 2014) decided on 25.04.2014 and Uttaranchal Paper Converters and Publishers through Proprietor Vs. State of U.P. and others (Misc. Bench No. 3898 of 2015) decided on 13.05.2014. 9. In view thereof, we are clearly of the view so far as Prayer (ii), mandamus sought by petitioner is nothing but grant of a money decree in extraordinary equit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
