Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 26664
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SHAJI P.CHALY, J
M/S. AKSHAYA BUILDERS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C)/14027/2018
SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SRI.BIMAL K. NATH, SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
A party may adjust amounts due against security obligations to prevent undue prejudice while fulfilling contractual requirements.
Headnote:
Contract - Partnership Firm - Security and Payment - Summary: The court addressed the obligations of a partnership firm under a contract, emphasizing the significance of adjusting due payments against the required security and mandating a timely resolution of grievances related to payment disputes.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a partnership firm, was awarded a contract but faced a dispute regarding the amount due for work performed and the requirement of additional security as per the selection notices.
Issues: Whether the petitioner could adjust due payment against required additional security and if the 2nd respondent is obligated to expedite the grievance process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that due amounts can be adjusted against security requirements, thereby safeguarding the petitioner's position while ensuring compliance with contractual obligations.
Final Decision: Writ petition disposed of with directions to expedite grievance resolution and extend time for compliance.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, is awarded with a contract by the 2nd respondent. As per Exts.P3 & P4 selection notices, the petitioner is directed to execute the agreement, provide security as well as additional security. So far as the security is concerned, the petitioner is directed to produce the treasury deposit, which the petitioner is willing to do. However, the contention advanced by the petitioner is that there is amount due to the petitioner on account of the work carried out by the petitioner as evident from Ext.P5 and if the said amount is adjusted against the additional security, no manner of prejudice will be caused to the 2nd respondent. In order to ventilate the grievances, the petitioner has submitted Exts.P6 & P7 before the 2nd respondent, which are pending consideration and seeks direction to dispose of the same.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to finalise the proceedings pertaining to Exts.P6 & P7 as early as possible and at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The time provided under Exts.P3 & P5 will stand extended for a period of one month. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, if any further amounts other than the amount adjustable from Ext.P5 is required, the petitioner is prepared to provide a Bank Guarantee for the additional amount.
The above writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
