Allowed

M/S. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Water Authority

Kerala HC8 Jun 2017WP(C)/8274/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the delay in disbursing funds for a part bill raised by a contractor under a work order. The Court held that prioritizing without a timeline is unsustainable and directed the Authority to pay the dues within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the first respondent to disburse the proceeds of the part bill within three months from the receipt of a copy of the judgment.

M/S. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Vs… — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/18TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 8274 of 2017 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S. REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE, 602, SHIV TOWERS, PATTO-PLAZA, PANAJI, GOA-403 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.C.JAMES.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY

¶9

SRI.K.V.GEORGE SRI.P.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR SRI.P.S.GIREESH SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY KUM.POOJA DILIP

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,

¶12

HEAD OFFICE, JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033

¶13

2. THE FINANCE MANAGER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,HEAD OFFICE, JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033

¶14

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.CIRCLE, COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 002

¶15

4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PROJECT DIVISION,

¶16

COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 002

¶17

R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sts

¶20

WP(C).No. 8274 of 2017 (H)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF WORK ORDER NO. PHCK/A3/3722/2013 DATED 4.3.2014 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER

¶24

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CC 4TH AND PART BILL IN FORM CB3 VOUCHER, DATED 30.3.2016, SANCTIONED IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER BY 4TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS READABLE COPY

¶25

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 23.6.2016 IN WP(C) NO.18152 OF 2016 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶32

W.P.(C) No.8274 of 2017

¶33

Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2017

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

The petitioner is executing a work for the Kerala Water Authority. They are entitled to raise part bills in the course of execution of the work for the completed portions of the work. The petitioner has, accordingly, raised a part bill for the completed portion of the work, and the officers concerned of the Water Authority, after processing the said part bill, requested the technical member of the Water Authority to provide funds required for honouring the part bill. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that the technical member of the Water Authority is not providing funds required for honouring the part bill raised in respect of the work. The

¶36

W.P.(C) No.8274 of 2017 -2-

¶37

petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to the Water Authority to disburse the amounts due to the petitioner.

¶38

The learned Standing Counsel for the Water Authority, on instructions, submitted that the funds r equested for effecting the payment due to the petitioner will be made available on priority basis.

¶39

It is beyond dispute that the contract enables the petitioner to raise part bills. When the contract enables the contractors to raise part bills for the completed portions of the work, the contractors contemplate the proceeds of the part bills also for execution of the remaining part of the work. As such, if the part bills are not honoured within a reasonable time, the progress of the work will be adversely affected. The stand of the Water Authority that the part bills will be honoured only on priority basis, without disclosing any time frame, cannot, therefore, be accepted.

¶40

W.P.(C) No.8274 of 2017 -3-

¶41

The writ petition, in the circumstances, is disposed of directing the first respondent to disburse the proceeds of the part bill referred to in the writ petition, within three

¶42

months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶43

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶44

bpr

M/S. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Water Authority

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

T.R. Sureshchandran Vs C.V. Sasidharan

Pan Pacific Engineering Services (P) Ltd. Vs the Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation

Anto Alphonse Vs State of Kerala

Radhamani Amma Vs the District Collector, Kollam

M.B.Moidu Haji Vs the District Collector

K.K.Raveendran Vs the State of Kerala