Disposed

M.J. Ajith Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Aug 2017WP(C)/17879/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition by a contractor seeking payment of a running bill. After the revised estimate was approved, the court directed respondents to effect payment within one month of receiving the judgment copy.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to effect payment of the admittedly due amount to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

M.J. Ajith Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/20TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 17879 of 2017 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M.J. AJITH KUMAR

¶8

PROPRIETOR, M/S.MERIDIAN CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS, TC 10/87, ANJANA SREE, PIPPINMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -05

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN SRI.V.SURENDRANATHAN NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001

¶12

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (BUILDING), PUBLIC OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695033

¶13

3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (SC) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING (SC), PUBLIC OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33

¶14

4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDINGS DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695033

¶15

5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (BUILDING SUB DIVISION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695033

¶16

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANTHOSH PETER

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

sdr/-

¶19

WP(C).No. 17879 of 2017 (H)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE DTD. 24./10/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.30/SEBSE/2014-15 DATED 11/11/2014 EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE TREASURY OFFICER EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RUNNING ACCOUNT BILL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 11.7.2016 BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.5.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

¶24

sdr/-

¶25

P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶26

W.P.(C) No.17879 of 2017

¶27

Dated this the 11^th day of August, 2017

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner is a contractor. A running bill was

¶30

raised by the authorities concerned in the course of execution of a work entrusted to him. It is stated that though the running bill was raised as early as on 11.07.2016, the payment covered by the same is yet to be effected. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition.

¶31

When the matter was taken up on 20.07.2017, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the amount could not be paid to the petitioner since the revised estimate of the work has not been approved by the competent authority. An interim order was passed,

¶32

W.P.(C) No.17879 of 2017

¶33

-2-

¶34

therefore, on 20.07.2017 directing the second respondent to approve the revised estimate in accordance with law.

¶35

Today, when this matter was taken up, the

¶36

learned Government Pleader submitted that the revised estimate of the work has been approved. If the revised estimate of the work has been approved, there cannot be any impediment at all in effecting the payments due to the petitioner.

¶37

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents concerned to effect the payments admittedly due to the petitioner, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶40

bpr

M.J. Ajith Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.J. Ajith Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.P. Lalu Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises

Sarasamma Vs the Federal Bank

Sundus Hamadaniya Salahudheen Vs National Institute of Fashion Technology

R. Narayanan Potti Vs P.H. Kurien

Ayra K.S. Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. Vs the Station House Officer