Dismissed
C.Alex v. General Manager
Kerala HCOP/5206/2002
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1929
OP.No. 5206 of 2002(T) ----------------------
PETITIONER:
C.ALEX,RAILWAY CONTRACTOR,SAJI BHAVAN, ELENJIKKODU,IRUMPANANGADU P.O.,EZHUKON,KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS
RESPONDENTS:
R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SADANANDA PRABHU,SR.SC.RAILWAYS SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC,RAILWAYS
R4 BY G.P. SRI. K.P. PRADEEP
THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER ON CMP 9206 OF 2002 IN OP 5206 OF 2002
DISMISSED
14.11.2007 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 20.3.1998
EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 27.10.2001 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. 1224 0082/98/99 DATED 12.12.2001 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. 1224 0082/98-99 DATED 18.1.2001 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY.
EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF SNOTICE DATED 16.1.2002 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SALES TAX OFFICER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE.
C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
O.P. NO. 5206 OF 2002
Dated this the 14th day of November, 2007
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a railway contractor who has filed the O.P. for direction to the Southern Railway to reimburse to him sales tax in accordance with terms of the contract. Having regard to the nature of dispute, I do not think the same can be settled in this proceeding. The provision for reimbursement of sales tax at actuals, though a term of the contract, cannot be enforced in writ proceedings. If Railway fails to reimburse the sales tax the same amounts to breach of contract and the petitioner's remedy is either to go for arbitration if there is provision for settlement of dispute through arbitration or to file civil suit in the matter. Since claim for reinbursement of sales tax is only part of the claim under the contract, there is no scope for settlement in this proceeding. Petitioner is free to approach the civil court or to go for arbitration for claiming reimbursement of sales tax.
O.P. is closed as above.
(C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the return of agreement or arbitration and the right to claim the sales tax reimbursement.
C. Alex
The General Manager, Southern Railway
C.N. Ramachandran Nair
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court