Disposed

Gopina Gopala Krishna v. The Government of Andra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC29 Aug 2023WP/17865/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sued for payment of bills and interest regarding NeeruChettu Scheme works. Respondents admitted principal payment. Court closed the writ petition granting liberty to claim interest via separate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed; liberty granted to petitioner to claim interest by initiating fresh/separate legal proceedings.

Gopina Gopala Krishna Vs The… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVAT<^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) /w/

¶2

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY QF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 17865 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Gopina Gopala Krishna, S/o. Satyanarayana aged about 58 years, Occ: Contractor, R/o Govaravaram Village,Koyyalagudem Mandal West Godavari Dist.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Government pf Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its principal secretary. Finance department. Secretariat buildings Amaravati.

¶12

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its principal secretary Irrigatioin and Water Resources department,Secretariat buildings Amaravati.

¶13

The District Collector, West Godavari district, Eluru . Godavari Dist.

¶14

The Engineer in Chief, Minor/Major Irrigation Department Irrigation . Bhavan,Vijayawada, Krishna Dist.

¶15

The Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation circle office, Eluru, West Godavari Dist.

¶16

The.Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Water Resources department Eluru West

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the , circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order pr direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents herp in not releasing the bills amount worth of Rupees 7,29,162/- with interest of Execution and completion of various works as per the agreements No. 103/201819 dt 19-7-2018, in the area of Koyyalagudam West Gpdavari dist under NeeruChettu Schpme to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total works were completed as illegal arbitrary and violative of article 14,16,21 of constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents to release and pay the bills worth of Rupees 7,29,162/- with interest to the petitioner fourthwith as per the agreements.

**** t

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to release and pay the bills worth of Rupees 7,29.162/- with interest to the petitioner fourthwith as per the agreements pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI BOKKA SATYANARAYANA KAMLA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents 1: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent 3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

Counsel for the Respondents 2,4 to 6: GP FOR IRRIGATION

¶27

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

THE HOITBL]^ SRI ^JSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶29

WmT PEniTIOW NO. 17865 OF 2021

¶30

ORDER;

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Finance and Plsinning, on oral instructions submitted that respondent authorities paid the total due amount claimed by the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, lesirned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents paid the principal amount, but not paid the interest as claimed by the petitioner. 4. In view of the submisisions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader that that the principal amount was already paid as claimed by the petitioner and also the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the further claim of interest for delayed payment can be agitated by way of initiation of separate/fresh legal proceedings is also valid and sustainable. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances and for the reasons stated above, the present Writ Petition is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to claim the interest amount, if any, by way of initiation of fresh/separate legal proceedings in accordance with law. No costs.

¶32

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if siny, pending shall stand

¶33

closed.

¶34

Sd/- U.SRIDEVI ASSISTANT RE^TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶35

OneCCto SRI BOKKA SATYANARAYANA. Advocate [GPUC] i. Two CCS to GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

¶36

3 ^^QCs to GP FOR REVENUE. High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR IRRIGATION, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies GSR

GSR

HIGH COURT

DATE0:29/08/2023

ORDER

WP.No.17865 of 2021

¶42

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶43

^^S^CHEO

Gopina Gopala Krishna v. The Government of Andra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopina Gopala Krishna v. The Government of Andra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malla Venkateswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.S Padmavathi Vs State of Ap,Prl.Scy,Iandcad,Gutur Dist,and 2

Udarapu Siva Ramakrishna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

U Mani Vs P Babu Rao

V. Subramanyam Vs Sri K.S.Jawahar Reddy, IAS

Nadmimpalli Chaitanya Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh