Back
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
Debashish Mitra – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. - The petitioner, being a proprietor of a firm carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. D. M. Enterprises, emerged successful in a tender floated by the respondent no.4 on June 9, 2020 and a provisional acceptance letter was issued to the petitioner on July 21, 2020. On the same date, the petitioner deposited a Performance Bank Guarantee of Rs.7,13,446/-.
2. The work order was issued in favour of the petitioner on July 31, 2020. An agreement was, accordingly, entered into between the parties on the same date.
3. Subsequently, the petitioner commenced the work in terms of such agreement, for maintenance and provisioning of land-line and broad- band network. However, due to subsequent difficulties faced by the petitioner, the petitioner gave a letter on August 24, 2020 intimating the respondent-authorities about the hindrance in the completion of the job.
4. Due to the natural calamity Amphan, on August 29, 2020 the petitioner further pointed out a set back to the work by his letter to the respondents.
5. The petitioner thereafter raised an invoice to the tune of Rs.5,80,326/-.
6. Subsequently, there was further correspondence between the
The judgment established the importance of strict adherence to contract clauses and the interpretation of notice requirements for termination, as well as clarified the applicability of alternative re....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute fell within the ambit of the arbitration clause in the contract and that the public law remedy was not required as an effective pr....
The court established that termination of a contract must comply with natural justice principles, requiring adequate reasoning and opportunity for the affected party to respond.
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to contractual procedures and the validity of penalties for non-performance, reinforcing the authority's right to terminate contracts under specified c....
Writ under Article 226 not maintainable for contractual termination disputes involving factual questions when arbitration clause exists, natural justice not violated, and no public law issue raised.
Writ petitions in contractual disputes are generally not maintainable if they involve disputed questions of fact.
The court reinforced that the existence of an arbitration clause limits the scope for judicial intervention in contractual disputes involving the state.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
