IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Yarenjungla Longkumer
P.C Vanlalawmpuia, S/o Late Biakliana – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for contract closure. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. discrepancy in payment amounts claimed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. contestation of payments and contract fulfillment. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 18 , 20) |
| 4. court's limitation on writ jurisdiction for factual disputes. (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. dismissal of petition with options for further action. (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.
Heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Lalbuatsaiha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Mary L Khiangte, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents.
2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to take immediate action as contemplated under clause 55.2 of the Standard Bidding Documents/GCC by closing all the 11 contract works awarded to the petitioner’s late father and to release all the amounts pending in connection with all the contract works mentioned in paragraph 4 of the writ petition with interest at the rate of 12.5 % per annum after adjusting the amount already released to the petitioner on 02.12.2024 as state
Pune Municipal Corporation and Another vs Harakchand Misirimal Solanki
Kasinka Trading and Another vs Union of India and Another
D.C.M Ltd and Another vs Union of India and Another
Life Insurance Corporation of India vs Escorts Limited and Others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.