The judgment underscores the necessity for transparency and fairness in financial disputes, mandating cooperation between parties to resolve liability issues.

JUDGMENT

A.K.BASHEER, J.

The long pending dispute between the appellant and the respondent does not seem to end even after several rounds of litigation.

2. The last writ petition filed by the petitioner as regards the correctness of the quantum of his alleged liability ended in the impugned judgment. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing the appellant to engage a Chartered Accountant of his choice who can sit with the Chartered Accountant of the respondent Board and settle the dispute.

3. The said judgment is called in question by the appellant contending interalia that the course adopted by the learned Single Judge may not help to resolve the real issue.

4. We have heard learned Senior counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

5. Today when the case is taken up, learned Senior counsel has invited our attention to Annexures A3 and A4, statements of account prepared by his Chartered Accountant. It is averred by the appellant in the affidavit filed along with the above statements that his Chartered Accountant has given two “versions” of statements of account (one on the basis of the actual number of days of delay, and the other, on the basis of the days for less than a month taken as a month). The Chartered Accountant has found the liability of the appellant as between Rs.56,000/- and 74,000/-. We do not propose to make any comment on the above figures or the mode of calculation. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel that the above liability does not include the additional land value claimed by the respondent in Ext.P17.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent takes exception to the whole exercise carried out by the appellant. He has his own arguments and he tries to justify the figure arrived at by the respondent.

Yet again, we refrain from making any comment on the said contention.

7. Learned Senior counsel submits that the appellant will be satisfied if the respondent takes a decision in the matter after considering Annexures A3 and A4, statements of account. According to him, annexures A3 and A4 will substantially satisfy the direction issued by the learned Single Judge, and it is now for the respondent to engage its Chartered Accountant and verify the correctness of the statements given by the appellant.

8. Learned Senior counsel has got yet another request. He submits that the direction issued by the respondent to the appellant to remit a sum of Rs.37,742/- towards additional land value + interest is quite vague and the respondent has not come forward with the details pertaining to the said calculation. He prays that the respondent may be directed to furnish further details about the said claim, so that, the appellant remit the said amount also, if it has been arrived at correctly.

9. In the above facts and circumstances, the writ appeal is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) Respondent shall take a decision in the matter and reckon the actual liability payable by the appellant after considering Annexure A3 and A4, statements of account prepared by his Chartered Accountant. The respondent shall engage its own Chartered Accountant to complete the said exercise.

(ii) The respondent shall give an opportunity to the appellant to be heard in the matter.

(iii) Respondent shall furnish the break up figures of the additional land value and interest thereon as regards the claim made by it in Ext.P17.

Writ appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

(S.R.BANNURMATH)

CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER)

JUDGE jes