Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
HABITAT TECHNOLOGY GROUP – Appellant
Versus
KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. illegal deductions and failure to process the petitioner's claims. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's directive for timely consideration of representations. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. final directions regarding status of proceedings. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
(i) “declare that the first respondent is not entitled to deduct centage charges and GST from the bills for the works done by the petitioner and covered by Exts.P3 to P6 agreements.
(ii) declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay late fee in respect of the works covered by Exts. P3 to P6 agreements.
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P15 representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the first respondent to release the amount of Rs. 96,03,943/- that is due to the petitioner in respect of the works done and covered by Exts.
P3 to P6 agreements.
(v) declare that the respondents are not entitled to proceed with the work covered by Ext.P16 letter before settli
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
