Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
RAMAKRISHNAN K P – Appellant
Versus
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contractor's completion of road restoration work and concerns over usage. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent's obligation to counter petitioner's claims regarding damage. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's examination of contractor's liability under defect liability clause. (Para 5) |
| 4. judgment ordering reconsideration of petitioner's objections. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a public contractor and was awarded with the restoration work of the road from Mulakkamthuruty to Punnamoodu Junction, as evidenced by Ext.P1 letter of acceptance dated 28.01.2023. As per the terms and conditions of the contract, the petitioner was to repair the potholes on the road, within the period specified in the contract and the defect liability period was fixed as six months. According to the petitioner, he had completed the work by repairing the potholes and making the road motorable. However, the petitioner noticed that, immediately after tarring the road, heavy vehicles carrying loads of 60MT and 80MT were permitted to be plied through the said road and since such kind of usage would damage the tarring work done by the petitioner, Ext.P3 intimation was issued to the 1st respondent, as early as on
1
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
