ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH , KARACHI

Suit No. 334/08

____________________________________________________________

Date                                         Order with signature  of Judge

____________________________________________________________

1. for hg.of CMA 1667/08

2. for issues.

--

25.5.2009

          Mr.Muhammad Ikram Siddiqi, Advocate for plaintiff.

          Mr.Tahahwar Ali Khan, Advocate for Defendants 1,3 & 4.

          Mr.Muhammad Idrees, Advocate for Defendant No.2.

          Mr.Qazi Majid, AAG.

                             ---

          This suit is for recovery of Rs.1,955,514/- for the works carried out  by the Plaintiff  in its capacity as a Contractor which works were awarded by Union Councils i.e. Defendants No.2 & 3. Counsel for Defendant No.2 & 3 (UC), who is also appearing for defendant No.4, District Officer, acknowledges that such works have been satisfactorily carried out  and bill is pending  with Defendant No.1 for approval.

Counsel for Defendant No.1 i.e. CDGK states that bills for  the works carried by the plaintiff are not being cleared only for  the reason that the Defendants No.2 & 3, while awarding contract, exceeded its budgetary allocations and, therefore, the same could not be paid. He, therefore, submitted that the responsibility for making payments, which is beyond budgetary allocation, squarely lies with the Defendant No.2 & 3 themselves.

Learned AAG states that  the Province of Sindh  has no concern with the non-payment of the plaintiff’s outstanding amount as the matter pertains to CDGK and the concerned Union Council.

In view of the admission made by the counsel for defendants No. 1 to 3  with regard to the works carried out by the plaintiff  on behalf of Union Councils, there is no other  option but to decree the suit in the sum of Rs.1,955,514/-. With regard to the claim for damages, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that the Plaintiff does not press for the same.

In case of non-payment of the decreetal amount by Defendant No.2 & 3, the said amount is to be paid by Defendant No.1 in 3 installments from the future budgetary allocations of Defendants No.2 & 3. Defendant No.1 is directed to process the bill of the plaintiff within thirty days. However, if Defendant No.1 finds that in the award of contract beyond budgetary allocations a particular officer of defendants No.2 & 3 could be made personally responsible, then  in such eventuality appropriate action may be taken.

JUDGE

SHARIF