Disposed

P.Vijayakumar v. Corporation of Kochi

Kerala HC6 Jan 2021WP(C)/16540/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the petitioner, a contractor, has no further grievance regarding payment delays attributable to the corporation's seniority list, as he has been paid substantially. However, considering medical emergency evidence regarding the petitioner's wife, the court directed the respondents to consider granting appropriate relief.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondents to consider the petitioner's medical situation and grant appropriate relief.

P.Vijayakumar Vs Corporation of Kochi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/16TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.16540 OF 2020(N)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

P.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O. RAMANKUTTY KAIMAL, AGED 58 YEARS, METHAYIL HOUSE, EDAPPILLY NORTH, ERNAKULAM-682 024.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.AADITHYAN S.MANNALI SRI.SAJAN MANNALI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 CORPORATION OF KOCHI, C/O. OFFICE OF CORPORATION OF KOCHI, PARK AVENUE ROAD, BOAT JETTY,KOCHI, PIN-682 011, REP BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, C/O. OFFICE OF CORPORATION OF KOCHI, PARK AVENUE ROAD, BOAT JETTY, KOCHI, PIN-682 011.

¶12

R1-R2 BY SMT.SAREENA GEORGE,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)No.16540/2020

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6^th day of January, 2021

¶18

The writ petition has been filed by a Contractor who has undertaken work on behalf of Corporation of Kochi, seeking to quash Ext.P6 and to direct the respondents to pay an amount of `10,54,478/- to the petitioner.

¶19

The fact that the petitioner has successfully completed the work is not in dispute. The case of the 1^st respondent is that the 1^st respondent is facing financial crunch and amounts can be released only in accordance with seniority in claims. The Corporation has already drawn a seniority list of Contractors to whom the amounts are due, taking into account the date of completion of work. Bills have already been paid by the Corporation, for the works completed by 31.08.2017. The petitioner will be paid amounts due on the basis of his seniority.

¶20

¶21

WP(C)No.16540/2020

¶22

When this writ petition came up for admission, this Court took into account the submission of the petitioner that his daughter's marriage is due on 06.09.2020. Accordingly, this Court by way of interim order dated 14.08.2020 directed the respondents to release the first and second bills presented by the petitioner within two weeks. The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent would submit that the first bill for 1,37,535/- and the second bill amounting to 3,96,650/- was paid to the petitioner on 03.09.2020 pursuant to the interim order of this Court.

¶23

Again when this writ petition came up for hearing on 19.10.2020, the respondents were directed to release the third bill submitted by the petitioner for an amount of `1,33,135/-. The said amount has also been paid. Now the petitioner contends that the petitioner's wife Mrs. Geetha M.P is suffering from Guillian barre syndrome which is an acute demyelinating disease and is undergoing treatment and the petitioner requires substantial amount for the

¶24

WP(C)No.16540/2020

¶25

¶26

treatment of his wife. Therefore a further direction may be given to the 1^st respondent to honour the fourth and fifth bill of the petitioner or atleast a portion of the amount may be released.

¶27

I have heard the learned counsel for the

¶28

petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶29

The petitioner has already been paid a substantial amount of the outstanding as per the interim directions of this Court. The stand of the Corporation of Kochi is that they have to honour the seniority list of the Contractors drawn on the basis of completion of work for making payment. In the circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner can raise a legal grievance only if the seniority list is overlooked in making payment. Therefore no further relief can be granted by this Court in this writ petition.

¶30

However taking into account the medical emergency pointed out by the petitioner evidenced by

¶31

¶32

¶33

Ext.P7 Medical Certificate, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may approach respondents 1 and 2 who may

¶34

consider the situation faced by the petitioner and grant appropriate relief to the petitioner, as is permissible.

¶35

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

ncd

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE INVITATION CARD RELATING OT THE PETITIONERS DAUGHTERS MARRIAGE EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OBTAINED FROM COCHIN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION DATED 22.6.2020 EXHIBIT P3 THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO CORPORATION OF KOCHI, DATED 202 MARKED AS EXT P3 EXHIBIT P4 THE REPRESENTATION TO CORPORATION OF KOCHI BY COCHIN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION DATED 24.6.2020 MARKED AS EXT P4 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C 13626/2020 DATED 7TH JULY 2020 EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05.08.2020 AFTER CONSIDERING EXT 3 REPRESENTATION EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF DISCHARGE SUMMARY AND INVOICE OF THE PETITIONER'S WIFE DATED 09/12/2020

P.Vijayakumar v. Corporation of Kochi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Vijayakumar v. Corporation of Kochi

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

Anil Kumar.E.M, Vs Indus Towers Ltd.

State Bank of India Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribe Employees Welfare Association Vs the Registrar (Society)

State Bank of India Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribe Employees Welfare Association (Kerala Circle) Vs the Sdm Cum Registrar ( F and S)

Dr. v. Vishnu Savanth, Vs State of Kerala

Sujith Prasad Vs the Reserve Bank of India

Mohanachandran Nair Vs the Managing Director