Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
SHIBU M. GEORGE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context of the contract agreement (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. contentions regarding delays and challenges in work completion (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 3. legal arguments raised by the petitioner and their implications (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 28) |
| 4. respondents' standpoint and defense against the petitioner's claims (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. court's dismissal of the writ petition and procedural directions (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 38) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is a registered 'A' Class PWD Contractor and who has undertaken the work of improvement of Vilanilam – Pilakavu Road in Mananthavady Grama Panchayat, seeks to quash Ext.P32 order and to declare that the 2nd respondent is incompetent to pass an order like Ext.P32 rescinding Ext.P1 work contract under the risk and cost of the petitioner and to order forfeiture of Performance Guarantee and Additional Performance Guarantee offered to the work. The petitioner has also sought incidental reliefs in the matter.
2. The petitioner states that on 17.02.2022, the petitioner has entered into Ext.P1 agreement for execution of the work named 'Improvement of Vilanilam - Pilaka
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
