Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

15. In para 4 of the plaint, the plaintiff has pleaded that the first quotation given to the defendants was of Rs.12,11,890/-. In para 7, it is pleaded by the plaintiff that after the completion of work, the plaintiff raised total bill dt.30.12.08 of Rs.8,66,337/-.

It is pertinent to mention here that in the corresponding para of W/S (para wise reply on merits), the defendants have not denied the factum of Ist quotation that it was for Rs.12,11,890/-. The defendants have not denied the factum of raising of total Bill of Rs.8,66,337/- by the plaintiff in the corresponding para of the W/S for the reasons best known to it. Moreover, Sh. Pradeep Kumar Sharma (DW-1) has clearly admitted the factum of raising of Final Bill in the sum of Rs.8,66,337/- in para 4 of the W/S (para wise reply on merits).

It is the plea taken by the defendants that the plaintiff has failed to complete the interior decoration work of the office of the defendants within 28 days from 28.10.09 as agreed but till date. It is also the plea of the defendants that the plaintiff has completed 20 % of the total work and that the plaintiff submitted the excessive bill of Rs.8,66,337/- to them.

19. In para 4 of plaint, it is pleaded by the plaintiff specifically that after 2-3 amendments, the new quotation was made of Rs.6,75,205/-. In the corresponding para of W/S (para wise reply on merits), same is not admitted by the defendants. In para 7 of the plaint, the plaintiff has pleaded specifically that the original bill dt. 30.12.08 was sent by post on 31.12.08 and that when the work was in progress, the defendants have made three payments of Rs.5.05 lacs total leaving behind Rs.3,61,337/-. In the corresponding para of the W/S, the said pleadings of the plaintiff are not denied by the defendants. The defendants have also failed to deny specifically the contents of para 9 & 10 of the plaint in the corresponding paras of W/S for the reasons best known to them.