Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
M/S. V. MATHA CONSTRUCTIONS – Appellant
Versus
THE CHIEF ENGINEER KERALA STATE RURAL ROADS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner claims recovery of amounts. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondents justify recovery based on lack of approval. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. court examines validity of recovery process. (Para 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. recovery requires substantiation; unilateral recovery is unsustainable. (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an ‘A Class’ contractor and claims to have an experience of 30 years in completing the several projects. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner being aggrieved by the recovery proceedings for an amount of Rs.34,57,128/-. Out of the said amount, an amount of Rs.18,98,376/- is recovered as per Ext.P6, from the bills payable to the petitioner in respect of another work. The writ petition is submitted in such circumstances seeking the following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to settle the final bill of the petitioner in relation to work as per Exhibit P2, namely, “PMGSY 2013-14 (Phase VIII – Batch 1) Package No. KR 07-25 Construction of Choovor – Elathunkapara Road” based on actual work executed and recorded in the Measurement Book in relatio
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
