Disposed

Surabhi Earth Movers v. the General Manager

Kerala HC19 Jul 2022WP(C)/13836/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam held that while paucity of funds cannot justify non-payment of earnest and security deposits due, the balance bill amount requires procedural compliance before sanctioning.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are directed to refund the Earnest Money Deposit and Security Deposit within two months; expeditious action for verification and sanction of the balance bill amount shall be taken upon

Surabhi Earth Movers Vs the General Manager — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 13836 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

SURABHI EARTH MOVERS HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER JINSON.N.JOHN, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.N.U.JOHN, NIRAPPUMYALIL HOUSE,KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM-686662. BY ADVS. S.SHANAVAS KHAN S.INDU

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE GENERAL MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN, CHENNAI-600003.

¶9

2 THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER(CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM-682016.

¶10

3 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER-II(CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶11

BY ADVS. MANU S., ASGI V. GIRISH KUMAR,CGC

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C) NO. 13836 OF 2022

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Dated this the 19^th day of July, 2022

¶17

The petitioner executed certain works for the Railways and some payments were made in accordance with the progress of the work. Although the petitioner submitted a final bill of Rs.15,00,000/-, after completing the work, the amount has so far not been disbursed. Besides the said amount, Rs.2,32,440/- is due on account of Earnest Money Deposit and Rs.8,78,001/- on account of Security Deposit. Thus, a total amount of Rs.26,10,441/- is due to the petitioner. The petitioner’s grievance is that, in spite of taking measurements and being satisfied with the work executed, no steps are being taken to disburse the amounts due. Hence, this writ petition.

¶18

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Central Government Counsel.

¶19

The arguments and the supporting documents show that the respondents are admitting the amounts due towards Earnest Money Deposit and Security Deposit. The reason for non-disbursal of the amount is

¶20

WP(C) NO. 13836 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

stated to be the paucity of funds. As regards the payment of balance amount towards the final bill, the submission is that the petitioner has to comply with certain procedural formalities, upon which alone, the bills can be verified and sanction for payment accorded.

¶23

Inasmuch as, there is no dispute with respect to the amounts due towards Earnest Money Deposit and Security Deposit, the respondents cannot deny payment on the ground of paucity of funds. Therefore, the respondents are directed to refund the Earnest Money Deposit and Security Deposit within two months. As regards the amount towards the final bill, once the petitioner complies with the requisite formalities, expeditious action for verification and processing of the bill and sanctioning the amount shall be taken by the respondents.

¶24

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶25

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶26

NB/19-7

¶27

WP(C) NO. 13836 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13836/2022

¶30

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶31

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE DATED 09/06/2018 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/02/2020 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶32

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶33

TRUE COPY

¶34

P.A. TO JUDGE

Surabhi Earth Movers v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surabhi Earth Movers v. the General Manager

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

Binu L S Vs Travancore Devaswom Board - Tdb

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Kerala

S.Neema Vs State of Kerala

Mahmood Vs State of Kerala

G.Vijayakumar Vs Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

Surabhi Earth Movers Vs the General Manager