SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 61736

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
GEORGE M PHILIP – Appellant
Versus
CHIEF ENGINEER – Respondent


Petitioner is a contractor, registered with the

PWD department and other departments. Petitioner has

executed a work namely, Thalavady-Edathua-Muttar Road

under the OTM-Village Road ODR 2015-16 scheme

executing an agreement and completed the work to the

satisfaction of the respondents.

2. The case projected by the petitioner is that,

in spite of earnest efforts made by the petitioner,

the amounts due under part bill is not released to

the petitioner.

3. A detailed statement is filed, refuting the

allegations and claims and demands raised by the

petitioner.

4. However I find that, there is no much dispute

with respect to the bill raised by the petitioner,

and the dispute is with respect to the issue raised

by the petitioner that, the amounts due is a deposit

work. Since the amounts are not disputed, I think it

is only appropriate that necessary directions are

issued, to take into account, Ext.P9 Order issued by

the Additional Chief Secretary to the Chief Engineer

dated 17.06.2019, directing to take appropriate

WP(C).No.12963 of 2019 3

action at the earliest possible.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader and

perusin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top