Disposed

P.K.Ramachandran v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Jun 2022WP(C)/2056/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a contractor challenging the non-refund of GST and unilateral rate reduction by the Cochin Corporation. The court directed the respondent to consider the petition's representation and pass an order after affording an opportunity of hearing within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P7 and take an appropriate decision after affording an opportunity of hearing within two months.

P.K.Ramachandran Vs the State of Kerala — 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

MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 2056 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

P.K.RAMACHANDRAN

¶8

A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, DENOOP RAMACHANDRAN DEEPA MANDIR THOPPUMPADY
P.O, KOCHI 682 005
BY ADVS.
K.BABU THOMAS
SMT.MARYKUTTY BABU

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

¶11

2 THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPREENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION OFFICE, KOCHI 682 011

¶12

3 THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033

¶13

4 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER CORPORATION OF COCHIN, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOCHI 682 011

¶14

BY ADV SHRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, SC, KOCHI MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

GP K.V.MANOJKUMAR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO. 2056 OF 2021

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT Dated this the 27^th day of June, 2022

¶21

The petitioner was awarded the contract for construction of office building for Cochin Corporation at Cochin. The petitioner completed the work and raised his bill. The writ petition is filed aggrieved by non-refund of the GST component, which the Corporation had specifically agreed to reimburse under Ext.P2. Another grievance is regarding the unilateral reduction of the rates after obtaining approval from the Government. Highlighting these grievances, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7.

¶22

Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that the petitioner may have executed supplementary agreements after Ext.P5.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the petitioner clarified that a supplementary agreement was executed, but under protest, as evidenced by Ext.P3.

¶24

Considering the limited relief sought, the Writ Petition

¶25

WP(C) NO. 2056 OF 2021

¶26

3

¶27

is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P7 and take an appropriate decision thereon, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Cochin Corporation. The order, as aforementioned, shall be passed within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶30

RK

¶31

WP(C) NO. 2056 OF 2021

¶32

4

¶33

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO. 1411/2015/LSGD
AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE BALANCE WORK
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
FOR WORKS VALUED RS. 18,62,74,660/-
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF PROTEST OF THE
PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF
THE ILLEGAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
DATED 15-11-2018 GOT EXECUTED ON 07-05-
2019 WITH REDUCED RATES FOR THE AGREED
ITEMS
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF CHEQUES FOR RS.
3,258,6,207/-
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE
PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE
PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 4TH
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER WITH
ENGLISH VERSION

P.K.Ramachandran v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.K.Ramachandran v. the State of Kerala

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

Manager, Vs District Collector/Chairman

Joy Joseph Vs Devi Das

P.B.Khabeer Khan Vs State of Kerala

Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Vs the State of Kerala

Suresh Mathew, Vs the Chief Conservator of Forest

Chacko Kurian Vs State of Kerala