Court dismissed review petition challenging original order on payment. Petitioner claimed liability arises only upon client payment, but Court held they must recover first. No review required due to lack of attempt to collect.
Review petition dismissed; original judgment of 26/5/2014 remains in force.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/24TH PHALGUNA, 1937
RP.No. 439 of 2014 (M) IN WP(C).23728/2011
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23728/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 26-05-2014
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 IN WPC:
1. KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DOOR NO.30/1521A, BAY UNDER THE BRIDGE NORTHERN SIDE OF RAILWAY, PONNURUNI, VYTTILLA KOCHI-19.
2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD. BELMOUTH BUILDING, EAST BLOCK, KURUPPAM ROAD THRISSUR 680 001.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SRI.B.BIPIN
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,4 & 5:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. V.P. THRIMATHY, AGED 64 YEARS S/O.V.P.CHERIYAPPU HAJI, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2. STATE OF KERALA
3. ATTAPADI HILL AREA DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY (AHADS) REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR AGALI P.O., PALAKKAD-678 581.
4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001
BY SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.VIJU THOMAS
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
RP NO.439/2014
APPENDIX
REVIEW PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE 1: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.60/20032004/RMT DT.11.08.2003
//True Copy//
PS to Judge
Rp
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
============= R.P.No.439 of 2014
in W.P. (C) No. 23728 of 2011
===================
Dated this, the 14th day of March, 2016
O R D E R
This review petition has been filed seeking to review judgment dated 26/5/2014 in WP(C) No. 23728/11. It is inter alia contended that by virtue of Annexure I agreement, the liability of the review petitioners to pay the amount to the writ petitioner arises only when it is received from the client. Client, according to them, is the 3rd respondent in the review petition. In fact, all the parties except the 3rd respondent herein were represented while the matter was being heard.
R.P.No.439 of 2014 in
W.P. (C) No. 23728 of 2011
-:2:-
review petitioner, was not produced before this Court. Even assuming that Annexure 1 can be relied upon, still, the obligation of the review petitioners to pay the final bill amount to the writ petitioner cannot be wiped out merely by relying upon Annexure 1.
Under such circumstances, I do not think that review of the judgment is required and accordingly, the review petition is dismissed.
Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
Rp14/03/2016
//True Copy//
P.S to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
whether the review petitioners are exempted from immediate payment liability by relying on an agreement showing recovery from a client
whether the omission to recover the amount from the client within over 1.5 years warrants review of the original judgment
Kerala State Construction Corporation Ltd.
V.P. Thrimathy
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
