Disposed

M/S. Brc Constructions v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Oct 2023WP/18997/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking mandamus to direct payment of withheld construction work amount. Court disposed of petition at admission stage with consent, directing respondents to release eligible amount within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release admitted net amount to petitioner within three months from date of receipt of order.

M/S. Brc Constructions Vs the State… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

RC,J W.P. NO. 18997 of 2023

¶3

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶4

WRIT PETITION No. 18997 of 2023

¶5

ORDER:

¶6

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226

¶7

of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶8

“…..issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of amount of Rs.36,15,742/- even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e. Construction of BT Road from Ramasingavaram to Badarala in Pedavegi (M) Bit 1, Bit 2, Bit 3, Bit 4, vide agreement dated 07.12.2022, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of Rs.36,15,742/- with interest @ 24% per annum.…..”

¶9

When the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri N. Srihari,

¶10

learned Standing Counsel, on written instructions dated 16.10.2023 submitted that, after statutory recoveries, the petitioner is eligible for an amount of Rs.35,69,023/- only but not Rs.36,15,742/- as claimed by him. The bills for admissible amount of Rs.35,69,023/- were in process in CFMS mode and sought three (03) months time for payment.

¶11

To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner reported no objection.

¶12

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for both sides, as the authorities intend to pay the eligible amount to the

¶13

¶14

RC,J W.P. NO. 18997 of 2023

¶15

petitioner and the petitioner intends to receive the same within the time sought by the learned standing counsel, this Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of both the learned counsel.

¶16

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to release the admitted/ legally entitled net amount to the petitioner at the earliest, and at any rate, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It would be open to the petitioner to agitate his claim

¶17

for interest, if any, payable by the respondents, if he is so advised, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶18

As sequel thereto, miscellaneous petition, if any, pending shall stand closed. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated.

¶19

_________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 16^th October, 2023 RR

¶20

¶21

RC,J W.P. NO. 18997 of 2023

¶22

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.18997 of 2023

¶24

16^th October, 2023

¶25

M/S. Brc Constructions v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Brc Constructions v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramayanam Mohan Raju S/o. Sanjeeva Raju, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh.

M/s.Sri v.B.Constructions Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Lakshmi Vigneshwara Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Tummala Lakshmana Rao Vs the State of Ap

Brc Constructions Vs the State of Ap

Brc Constructions Vs the State of Ap