IYYAPU PANDURANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the counsel appearing for both sides. The facts which are not at all in dispute are that the revision petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed the suit for the following reliefs : (A) for a declaration that the proceedings of the defendant in RC. No. 3775/82/e2 dt. 3-5-89 is arbitrary, illegal and capricious and liable to be set aside; (B) for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to get the remaining portion of the work of the tender to be done by the plaintiff only;

( 2 ) ADMITTEDLY, the plaintiff was the contractor for the construction of shopping complex being the lowest tenderer and alleging that the plaintiff failed to complete the work in time, under the impugned proceedings, the respondent-Municipality cancelled the contract, which was in favour of the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed the suit for two reliefs : (A) for a declaration that the proceedings cancelling the contract are arbitrary, illegal and capricious;and (B) for a mandatory injunction directing the respondent-Municipality to get the remaining portion of the work done by the plaintiff. While so, the plaintiff valued the relief

Click Here to Read the rest of this document