Disposed

M/S. Maryamatha Infrastructure Private Limited v. Kerala Water Authority

Kerala HC5 Jun 2020WP(C)/2695/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a company awarded a contract, sought to adjust pending bills from executed works towards the security deposit and performance guarantee for the new contract. The court permitted the adjustment subject to the respondent satisfying itself that the bills pertain to works executed by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the 2nd respondent to consider the request for adjustment of pending bills towards security deposits and performance guarantee, subject to verifying ownership and no impediments.

M/S. Maryamatha Infrastructure Private Limited… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

WP(C).2695/2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.2695 OF 2020(J)

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

M/S. MARYAMATHA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY MARYMATHA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY), MARYMATHA SQUARE, ARAKKUZHA ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM-686 661, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SABU CHERIAN.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.SHANES METHAR

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶13

2 THE SUPERINTENDEING ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PH CIRCLE, KOCHI-682 011.

¶14

3 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PH CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

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

¶16

R1-4 BY SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).2695/2020

¶19

¶20

V.G.ARUN, J.

¶21

W.P(C).No. 2695 of 2020

¶22

Dated this the 5^th day of June, 2020

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioner Company has been awarded with the contract work by the Kerala Water Authority with proximate value of Rs.14,45,00,000/-. As per the terms of the award, the petitioner is required to provide security deposit and performance guarantee of Rs.72,25,000/-. Fifty percent of the amount is to be provided in the form of Treasury deposit and the balance 50% in the form of bank guarantee. As per the averments in the writ petition, the petitoiner has undertaken other works for the Kerala Water Authority and part bills for an amount of Rs.5,46,23,481/- is due towards the executed works. The petitioner relies on Exhibit P6 circular issued by the Public Works Department permitting adjustment of amounts due to the contractors under completed works towards security deposit for new contracts awarded. It is alleged that in spite of repeated request for adjustment of the pending bills towards the security deposit and performance guarantee to be provided at the time of execution of the new agreement, the respondents have not taken any positive action, resulting in execution of the agreement and commencement of the work getting delayed. The petitioner therefore seeks the issuance of

¶25

WP(C).2695/2020

¶26

¶27

writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allow adjustment of pending bills as security for the new work awarded.

¶28

On behalf of the respondents a counter affidavit has been filed stating that the petitioner and the awardee, to which amounts are due based on pending bills (M/s.Marrymatha Prathibha Consortium), are different entities. It is stated that M/s.Marrymatha Prathibha Consortium has executed a power-of-attorney in favour of the Branch Manager, South Indian Bank, Muvattupuzha authorising collection of the amounts due under the pending bills and hence only the Branch Manager has the right to make adjustments with respect to the payments to be made towards those bills.

¶29

This Court had issued an interim direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to execute the agreement and carry out the work provisionally and subject to further orders in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made available the judgments rendered by this Court in similar writ petitions, including the writ petition filed by the petitioner.

¶30

On a consideration of the facts as also the directions issued in the earlier judgments, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for adjustment of the amounts due under the pending bills towards the security deposits and performance guarantee for the new work awarded. It is made clear that 2^nd respondent will be at liberty to decide as to whether

¶31

WP(C).2695/2020

¶32

¶33

the pending bills pertain to the works executed by the petitioner and whether there is any other impediment in making the adjustment. If, as claimed, the pending bills pertain to the works executed by the petitioner, then necessarily the amounts due under those bills shall be adjusted towards the security deposit and performance guarantee to be provided. The interim order shall continue to operate till the request of the petitioner is considered in terms of the above directions.

¶34

V.G.ARUN, JUDGE

¶35

vgs

¶36

WP(C).2695/2020

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2695/2020

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE NO.PHC/CHN/GL/245/2017 VOL.II DATED 13.01.2020. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LOA NO.KWA/PHC/TVM/D4/2150/2018 AMRUT DATED 29.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED VOUCHER COPY OF CB3 OF CC 1ST AND PART BILL NO.1 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,53,57,827/- (PAYABLE AMOUNT). EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED VOUCHER COPY OF CB3 OF CC 2ND AND PART BILL NO.2 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,16,58,504/- (PAYABLE AMOUNT).

¶41

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED VOUCHER COPY OF CB3 OF CC 2ND AND PART BILL NO.2 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,16,58,504/- (PAYABLE AMOUNT). EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVT.CIRCULAR NO.4593/H3/2003/PWD DATED 07.09.2003. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MIPLC/TSS/20/1757 DATED 18.01.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.MIPLC/ST/20/1804 DATED 27.01.2019.

M/S. Maryamatha Infrastructure Private Limited v. Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Maryamatha Infrastructure Private Limited 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nisar Vs State of Kerala

A.P.Subair Vs State of Kerala

P.J.Joseph Vs the Kerala State Information Commission

Joseph John Vs Kerala Water Authority

Basil Babu Vs the Directorof Technical Education

Sabik K.H Vs the Principal, Malabar College of Engineering