Disposed

Roy Varghese v. the Managing Director

Kerala HC17 Sept 2020WP(C)/17388/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a completed government contractor, sought refund of security and payment dues. Court directed release of retention and maintenance amounts on executing a simple bond within three months; trial run amount to be released after successful completion of trial run.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release retention and maintenance amounts on execution of simple bond; trial run amount release conditional on successful trial run.

Roy Varghese Vs the Managing Director — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

W.P(c).No.17388/2020-W

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 26TH BHADRA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.17388 OF 2020(W)

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

ROY VARGHESE AGED 48 YEARS PUTHENVELIYIL HOUSE, THIRUNALOOR P.O., CHERTHALA,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.JOMY GEORGE SRI.R.PADMARAJ SRI.DEEPAK MOHAN SMT. CHITRA N. DAS SHRI.RISHAB S.

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALA BHAVAN, VELLAYAMABALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024

¶13

2 SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.CIRCLE, KOLLAM-691 001

¶14

3 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.DIVISION, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-691 523

¶15

R1-3 BY SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶16

SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL,SC,KWA

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.P(c).No.17388/2020-W

¶19

¶20

P.V.ASHA, J .

¶21

W.P(c) No.17388 of 2020-W

¶22

Dated this the 17^th day of September, 2020

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

The petitioner is a Government contractor, who executed the work of RWSS to Kollam in Vechoochira Panchayat as per an agreement entered into between him and the 2^nd respondent on the basis of a tender invited by the respondents. It is stated that even though the petitioner completed the work in 2016 itself, the project is not commisioned so far on account of the non completion of other works to be done by other parties. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents for refund of security deposit, retention amount, maintenance amount as well as trial run amount.

¶25

Heard the learned Standing Counsel also, who submitted that the security deposit, retention amount and maintenance amount can be released to the petitioner on executing a simple bond with the respondent and the trial run amount can be disbursed after the trial run is over, in accordance with the terms of contract.

¶26

Accordingly the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the retention amount and maintenance amount due to the petitioner, on execution of a simple bond by the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The amount due under the head trial run amount shall also be released on successful completion of the trial run.

¶27

rtr/

¶28

W.P(c).No.17388/2020-W

¶29

¶30

APPENDIX

¶31

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶32

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT HAVING NO.15 / 2015-16 DATED 18.11.2015
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 02.12.2015 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION DATED 28.06.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH REGARD TOT HE CC 1ST AND PART BILL
EXHIBIT	P5 TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH REGARD TO THE CC 1ST AND FINAL BILL
EXHIBIT	P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.11.2018 IN W.P.C NO.30912/2018 OF THIS HON'BE COURT

Roy Varghese v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roy Varghese v. the Managing Director

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

Palakkad Municipality Vs Girija

Palakkad Municipality, Vs Arumughan

M/S. Shreya Life Sciences Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Navas Shereef.K.M Vs the District Magistrate

Rise Capital Operative Finance Private Ltd., Vs the Reserve Bank of India

Hussain Khan Vs Thiruvananthapuram Development Authority(Trida)