##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1686/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026

0.40521958370990385

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1686 of 2003 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No No

==========================================================

M.R.K.BROTHERS,THRO'ITS PARTNERS & ORS.

Versus KUTCH DISTRICT PANCHAYAT

==========================================================

Appearance:

DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESTENTATIVES for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR ABHAYKUMAR P SHAH(3093) for the Appellant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3

MR. NISARG N JAIN(8807) for the Defendant(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 01/04/2026

JUDGMENT

1. The judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.175 of 1992 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bhuj Kachchh dated 31.12.2002 is the subject matter of this appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘the Code’, for short), at the behest of the original

defendant.

2. By the impugned judgment and award, learned trial Court decreed the suit of Kachh Jilla Panchayat and directed the defendant to pay Rs.7,66,119.39 ps to the plaintiff Kachh

Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by MISHRA AMIT V.(HC00187) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 10 20:22:21 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1686/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026

0.40521958370990385

Jilla Panchayat along with 12% from the date of suit till realisation.

3. The facts, in nutshell, are that the construction department of the Kachh Jilla Panchayat quoted the tender for providing road diversion on Nakhtrana – Nirona Road with total consideration of Rs.12,88,531.10 ps. The defendant being certified contractor filed the tender and since its tender was competitive and 20% less than fixed price, his tender has been accepted at the total consideration of Rs.12,30,834.88 ps and thereafter the Work Order was issued on 18.03.1987. According to the plaintiff Kachh Jilla Panchayat defendant did not commence work and, therefore, again the plaintiff wrote letter to the defendant on 15.06.1987 to start the work. However, though work was commenced, it was not in progress and repeatedly Kachh Jilla Panchayat was insisting defendant to progress the work and also to complete the same in stipulated time period. Further, the request of the defendant to extend the time period for completion of work was also accepted and accordingly the defendant was permitted to complete the work on or before 17.07.1989, however, ultimately defendant did not carry the work and breached the contract. Therefore, the construction department of the Jilla Panchayat on 28.09.1990 decided to reassign the contract and as per the terms and conditions of the contract it was decided to get the work done from some other contractor at the risk and cost of the defendant. Ultimately, Jilla Panchayat assessed Rs.7,66,119.39 ps as a loss and it was decided to recover the said loss at risk and cost of the plaintiff as per the terms and conditions of the

Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by MISHRA AMIT V.(HC00187) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 10 20:22:21 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/FA/1686/2003 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026

0.40521958370990385

contract and accordingly the suit was initiated before the Civil Court (S.D.), Kachh-Bhuj being Special Civil Suit No.175 of

1992. The said suit was decreed in the aforesaid terms.

4. Being aggrieved, the original defendant has filed this appeal.

5. Heard learned advocate Mr.Abhay P. Shah appearing for the appellant and learned advocate Mr.Nisarg Jain for the

respondent.

6. At the outset, what would be noticeable is that the impugned judgment governs the disposal of the suit as well as counter claim. The suit filed by the Kachh Jilla Panchayat has been decreed whereas the counter claim filed by the present

appellant has been dismissed.

7. In the af