Disposed

M/S. Ashirwad Trading Company v. Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

Kerala HC22 Nov 2016WP(C)/28483/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging withholding of payment for supplies due to alleged inferior quality. Petitioner unable to reply to show-cause notice due to lack of documents. Court directed Respondent to provide documents, record petitioner's objections, grant hearing, and decide within two months while releasing admitted amounts.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 1st Respondent to supply documents for Ext.P17, record petitioner's objections, grant hearing, and decide within two months; release admitted dues during interregnum.

M/S. Ashirwad Trading Company Vs 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

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 28483 of 2016 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

M/S. ASHIRVAD TRADING COMPANY, 1ST FLOOR, P.K.COMPLEX, NEAR BIG BAZAR, CALICUT-673 001, REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR SUDHEER KUMAR.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., MAVELI BHAVAN, MAVEL ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682 020.

¶11

REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., KOZHIKODE- 673 000.

¶12

MANAGER, KERALA CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., KODUVALLY DEPOT, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶13

MANAGER (PURCHASE), MAVELI BHAVAN, MAVEL ROAD GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682 020.

¶14

VIGILENCE OFFICER, MAVELI BHAVAN, MAVEL ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR KOCHI-682 020.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.PAULOCHAN ANTONY P., S.C BY ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB, S.C

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Msd

¶18

WP(C).No. 28483 of 2016 (I)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶21

P1 PHOTOCOPY OF PUR. ORDER DATED 18-11-2015.

¶22

P2 PHOTOCOPY OF PUR. ORDER DATED 19-11-2015.

¶23

P3 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.180/23-11-2015.

¶24

P4 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.181/24-11-2015.

¶25

P5 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.183/01-12-2015.

¶26

P6 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.187/19-12-2015.

¶27

P7 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.188/22-12-2015.

¶28

P8 PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 27-02-2016.

¶29

P9 PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 08-04-2016 IN W.P(C).NO. 13057/2016.

¶30

P10 PHOTOCOPY OF PUR.ORDER DATED 28-10-2015.

¶31

P11 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.174/03-11-2015.

¶32

P12 PHOTOCOPY OF INV.NO.176/04-11-2015.

¶33

P13 PHOTOCOPY OF GRS NO.151263/04-11-2015.

¶34

P14 PHOTOCOPY OF GRS NO.151335/05-11-2015.

¶35

P15 PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION DATED 25-02-2016 UNDER RTI ACT.

¶36

P16 PHOTOCOPY OF INFORMATION SUPPLIED AGAINST EXT.P15.

¶37

P17 PHOTOCOPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 01-01-2016.

¶38

P18 PHOTOCOPY OF REPLY TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE.

¶39

P19 PHOTOCOPY OF REPORT DATED 13-01-2016 BY FOOD QUALITY MONITORING LABORATORY.

¶40

P20 PHOTOCOPY OF REPORT DATED 28-01-2016 BY REGIONAL ANALYTICAL LAB, ERNAKULAM.

¶41

P21 PHOTOCOPY OF REPORT DATED 22-01-2016 BY REGIONAL ANALYTICAL LAB, ERNAKULAM.

¶42

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶48

W.P.(C)No.28483 of 2016

¶49

Dated this the 22^nd day of November, 2016

¶50

J U D G M E N T

¶51

Petitioner admittedly had supplied certain products

¶52

to the 1^st respondent corporation on the basis of a tender awarded to the petitioner. However, Ext.P17 show cause notice was issued to the petitioner pointing out certain discrepancies in the earlier supply made by the petitioner. Thereupon, petitioner has submitted Ext.P18 reply. It is also pointed out by the petitioner that in Ext.P17 the details are not furnished to the petitioner which disables the petitioner from giving a proper reply to the show cause notice. However, the subject matter is pending before the authority, but the respondents are reluctant to release the amounts due to the petitioner on the basis of supply made by the petitioner, on the alleged reason that on securing a report from the analytical lab it was found that the products supplied by the petitioner

¶53

were of inferior quality. It is in this background

¶54

W.P.(C)No.28483 of 2016 2

¶55

petitioner seeks appropriate direction from this Court for the payment against the supply made by the petitioner.

¶56

Respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit refuting the claims and demands made by the petitioner and also contenting that since, there is a report drawn by the respondent from the Regional Analytical Laboratory as per the provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, damages is to be quantified by the 1^st respondent against the petitioner and the subject matter is pending consideration before the Managing Director of the Corporation.

¶57

Taking note of the respective submissions made across the bar, I think it is appropriate that, since a show cause notice is issued by the 1^st respondent, a quietus is to be given to the whole issue taking note of the objections submitted by the petitioner also. Since learned counsel for the petitioner contented that, the basis and the documents, on which Ext.P17 was issued, is not made available to the petitioner, petitioner is unable to give a proper reply to Ext.P17 show cause notice.

¶58

W.P.(C)No.28483 of 2016 3

¶59

In that view of the matter, I direct the 1^st respondent to take on board Ext.P17 show cause notice issued to the petitioner, supply all documents relied upon by the 1^st respondent against the supply made by the petitioner to it, receive an objection from the petitioner with respect to Ext.P17, provide sufficient opportunity of hearing and take a decision in accordance with law. The whole exercise shall be completed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, if any amount is admitted by the 1^st respondent the same shall also be released to the petitioner during the interregnum.

¶60

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶61

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

¶62

rmm/23/11/2016

¶63

[ True copy]

¶64

P.A. to Judge

M/S. Ashirwad Trading Company v. Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Ashirwad Trading Company v. Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Opm Dream Mill Cinemas and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Malayalam Communications Ltd.

George Joseph Vs the Enviornmental Engineer

Perumani Siva Kshethra Hyndava Seva Trust Vs District Collector

K. Chandramohan Vs District Collector

Thankamma Vs the Sub Collector & Presiding Officer

Chinmaya Mission Educational & Cultural Trust Vs State of Kerala