The Court allowed the writ petition invoking the doctrine of non-traverse due to the absence of an affidavit-in-opposition. The respondents were directed to pay the petitioner Rs.29,85,460/- within three months.
Direction to respondents to jointly pay the petitioner Rs.29,85,460/- within three months of service of certified copy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010086832022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3015/2022
A. S ENTERPRISE
ZOO NARENGI ROAD, GUWAHATI-21 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR ANIL CHANDRA SARKAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LATE JAY CHANDRA SARKAR, R/O HOUSE NO-2, M. TAMULI PATH, RANGAMAN NAGAR, P.S.-BASISTHA, GUWAHATI-40
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), DISPUR, GUWAHATI6
2:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (BUDGET BR.) DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
4:THE SECRETARY UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DONER NEW DELHI 5:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3
Page No.# 2/4
6:THE ADDL. CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ELECT.) ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 7:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD GUWAHATI ELECTRICAL CIRCLE GUWAHATI-1 8:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER P.W.R.D DIBRUGARH LAHOWAL MORAN AND TINGKHONG TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION DIBRUGARH PIN-786001
9:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINNER PWD JORHAT ELECTRICAL DIVISION JORHAT PIN-78500
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R PATGIRI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 02-06-2023
Heard Mr. K.R. Patigiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on call for the PWD. However, Mr. K. Gogoi, learned CGC appears for the respondent no.4.
Page No.# 3/4
to invoke the doctrine of non-traverse and presume that the claim of the petitioner is admitted by the respondents.
Page No.# 4/4
on the Chief Engineer, PWD (Roads) as well as Addl. Chief Engineer PWD (Electrical), respondent nos.5 and 6 respectively.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of the alleged unpaid balance of Rs.29,85,460/- arising from a work order for road construction.
Whether the doctrine of non-traverse can be invoked in the absence of an affidavit-in-opposition to presume the claim is admitted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A. S ENTERPRISE
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS
Kalyan Rai Surana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
