Disposed

G.Sundaresan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Oct 2016WP(C)/21754/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25-05-2016 regarding pending dues from an agreement within two months and disburse the amount within another two months if payable.

What did the court decide?

Direction given to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and disburse dues if found payable within specified timelines.

G.Sundaresan Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/13TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 21754 of 2016 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

G.SUNDARESAN, KAILAS, MUNDAKKAL WEST, KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶8

BY DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADVS.SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR SRI.ELIAS KURIAN SMT.SHYNI GEORGE SMT.P.S.SIJI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2. THE SECRETARY, KOLLAM DISTRICT PANCHAYAT, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM- 691 001.

¶12

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RON BASTIAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.C.M.SURESH BABU

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

mbr/

¶15

WP(C).No. 21754 of 2016 (T)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶18

P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION GIVEN BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER L.S.G.D DISTRICT PANCHAYAT DIVISION, KOLLAM DATED 30-01-2009.

¶19

P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.02.2009.

¶20

P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25-05-2016.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶27

W.P.(C). No. 21754 of 2016 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 05^th day of October, 2016

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Heard respective counsel.

¶30

Pursuant to conferment of an award, petitioner has

¶31

entered into Ext.P2 agreement with the second respondent and according to the petitioner, petitioner has completed the work in terms of the agreement. However, the money due to the petitioner was not paid and it is pending from the year, 2010. Inspite of the earnest efforts of the petitioner, the money was not released, consequent to which petitioner has submitted Ext. P3 dated 25.05.2016 seeking to pay the balance amount of Rs. 2,69,171/- to the petitioner.

¶32

Since, Ext. P3 is pending consideration before the second respondent, I think it is only appropriate that a direction is issued to the second respondent to take a decision on the same. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider Ext. P3 representation submitted by the petitioner and take a decision on the same, within one

¶33

W.P.(C). No.21754 of 2016

¶34

¶35

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needless to say, if amounts are found due to the petitioner, the same shall be disbursed to the petitioner, within a further period of two months thereafter.

¶36

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

SHAJI P. CHALY

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

DCS

G.Sundaresan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Sundaresan v. State of Kerala

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

Nalini Harikumar Vs Trivandrum Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. @ Kerala Constructions

S.Dathan Vs Mr.Antony Chacko

Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala

M.Naseema Vs the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives, South Circle

M.P.Joosa Alias Jose Vs the State Secretary , Masters Athletic Association

Leelakrishnan Vs the Director of Fisheries