As per case facts, the plaintiff-society executed reconditioning work for the defendant department after submitting a tender, and the work was completed and approved. Despite this, the department withheld payment, ... citing a lack of funds. The trial court decreed the suit, but the First Appellate Court reversed it, stating the work order was not properly sanctioned and was considered a "Piece Work." The plaintiff then filed a Second Appeal, arguing the Lower Appellate Court ignored crucial evidence and that similar societies had received payment for comparable work. The question arose whether the plaintiff was entitled to payment for work done, even if formal contract procedures were not strictly followed, given the department benefited from the services. Finally, the High Court found that the work was executed and the department benefited, allowing the appeal and decreeing the suit with interest under Section 70 of the Contract Act.