STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. versus MIS. RUCHI PRINTERS

Citation: [2016] 3 S.C.R. 538 · Decided: 05-05-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V. GOPALA GOWDA, ARUN MISHRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
[2016) 3 S.C.R. 538 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. 
v. 
MIS. RUCHI PRINTERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 48 I 7 of20 I 6) 
MAY05,2016 
[V. GOPALA GOWDA AND ARUN MISHRA, JJ.] 
Contractual dispute - Inte1ference with - Print order placed 
by State for printing booklets - Booklets to be supplied by pri11ter 
on time bound basis - Non-co111pletio11 of work withi11 the time li111it 
- Extension of time and stated that 110 books would be accepted 
after the extended time - Challenged to, by the printer - High Court 
directing to the State to accept the supply of booklets from the printer 
and make pay111ent accordingly - Writ appeal by State - Dis111issal 
of - On appeal, held: Time was the essence of contract and the 
printing of booklets was to be completed at the earliest - In case 
any work remains incomplete, the work order was ro be treated as 
cancelled - It was made clear that no booklets were to be received 
after the extended ti111e - Thus, there was no reason for printers to 
print any booklets after cancellation of order and printing thereafte1; 
was wholly unauthorized - Thus, lifter the order for printing booklets 
stood cancelled on failure to supply ll'ithin the stipulated period, 
the contract ca111e to an end, there was no reason for the printers to 
print the booklets - The co111111u11ication asking the printer to print 
and supply the booklets, did not confer on them a right to print 
books ajier the extended date - Thus, the High Court erred in the 
facts of the case to inte1fere in contractual matter and by granting 
the relief - Payment to be made to the printers for booklets supplied 
till the extended date. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4817 
of20l6. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 04.09.2012 of the High Court 
G 
of Madhya Pradesh principal scat at Jabalpur in Writ Appeal No. 1020 
of2009. 
WITH 
C. A. Nos. 4818 and 4819 of2016. 
H 
C. D. Singh, Adv. for the Appellants. 
538 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. v. MIS. RUCH! 
539 
PRINTERS 
G. S. Ahluwalia, Dinesh C. Pandey, Ms. Jyoti Pandey, Tushar 
A 
Sharma, Palash S., Advs. for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Cou11 was delivered by 
ARUN MISiffiA, J. I. Leave granted. 
2. The State has preferred the appeal as against the judgment 
and order passed by the High Court of M.P. in the writ appeal and the 
writ petitions decided by a common order dated 4. 9.2012 dismissing the 
writ appeal and allowing the petitions, thereby directing the State 
Government to accept all materials which was ready for delivery on 
22.5.2008 and quashing order dated 30.1.2009 cancelling the 
communication dated 22.5.2008. Fm1her direction has been issued to 
make payment to the printers as per the terms and conditions of the 
order dated 16.1.2008 read with order dated 25.2.2008. 
3. Facts in short referred to from SLP [CJ No.3273012013 -
State ofM.P. & Ors. v. Mis. Ruchi Printers indicate that the State Printing 
& Writing Articles Depa11ment of Madhya Pradesh through its Controller, 
invited quotations vide letter dated 2.1.2008 for printing Bhu-Adhikar 
and Rin Pustikas. On 16.1.2008 printing order was placed with Mis. 
Ruchi Printers for supply of 37,07,726 copies of Bhu-Adhikar and Rin 
Pustika. At least half of the booklets were to be supplied in the first lot 
till 8.2.2008 and the rest were to be supplied before 25.2.2008. On 
25.2.2008 the Deputy Controller wrote a letter on behalf of the Controller 
while approving the modified booklet. The printers were asked to ensure 
the supply after printing the allotted work. On 28.3 .2008 another letter 
was written that the time limit fixed was already over so· rest of the 
work may be completed till 31.3 .2008. After 31.3 .2008 no booklets shall 
be accepted. The decision dated 28.3.2008 was questioned by filing writ 
petitions. Said writ petition filed by Mis. Ruchi Printers had been allowed 
by Single Bench vi de common judgment and order dated 6.11.2008. State 
was directed to accept the supply of I 0.75 lakhs of Rin Pustikas from 
Mis. Ruchi Printers and to make payment in accordance with the terms 
and conditions of the contract. In another W.P. No. I 031912008 decided 
by same order, the single Bench asked the petitioner to approach the 
State Government and the Government to consider the claim in respect 
of the materials already supplied and to settle the claim if not already 
settled. No other relief was given. 
4. Aggrieved by the order passed in the case of Ruchi Printers, 
St
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.