Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

M/S. RAAG RANG AND ANR. versus THE GENERAL MANAGER, DELHI TELEPHONES AND ORS.

Decided
3 April 1997
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[1997] 3 S.C.R. 565 · 1997 INSC 359

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

The appellants claim that they have paid a sum of Rs. 5,370.35 together with reconnection charges of Rs. 50, nonetheless, there is a thn;at of disconnection to the appellant. In the letter, Annexure-E at page 36 of the paper book, it is stated as under :

p. 565, margin F

"Please refer to this letter of even No. dated 8.11.85 regarding payment of telephone dues pertaining to telephone No. 386056.

p. 565, margin G

You may please recall your visit to Sh. K.K. Trikha Area Manager (Central) on 28.8.85 in connection with payment of the dues against telephone No. 386056. During the discussion you have intimated that the payment of the said bills were made in the 1st week of May, 79. Investigations have been made by GMT office and records have been thoroughly checked. Payment of bills in question detailed below do not appear in the bonds of GMT office.

pp. 565–566, margin G

You are therefore again requested to arrange payment of the following bills and furnish payment particulars within 10 days from

p. 566, margin A

the date of issue of this letter;"

p. 566, margin B

In view of this letter, the primary disputed question is of fact, viz., whether or not payment has been made. Under these circumstances, we cannot satisfactorily decide the dispute. Alternative arbitration under Section 11-A of the Telegraphs Act is available for adjudication of the dispute. It is open to the appellants either to make payment of the bill or submit an application to the competent authority to adjudicate the dispute and on such application being mode appropriate decision would be taken. Until then, the interim stay granted by this Court would continue. The appellants shall make payment of an application, as the case may be, within 30 days from today, subject to such objections that may be raised.

p. 566, margin B

The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. T.N.A. Appeal disposed of.

p. 566, margin D