Allowed

Easy Infra Inc. v. Fact -Rcf- Building Products Ltd. (Frbl)

Kerala HC25 Sept 2023WP(C)/3265/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by a contractor demanding payment of dues from a tourism council. The court directed payment to be made within three months, relying on the first respondent government agency's admission of having issued a completion certificate and recommendation for disbursement.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to disburse all eligible amounts within three months from the date of receipt of the judgment.

Easy Infra Inc. Vs Fact -Rcf- Building… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 3RD ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 3265 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

EASY INFRA INC

¶7

TC 39/1492, KALYAN HOSPITAL ROAD, RAJ TOWER ARYA, SALAI, MANACAUD P.O., TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS PARTNER, M.LALIT KUMAR, S/O.N.MURALIDARAN, AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT 19/2, SHANMUGAMAR SALAI, SAKTHI NAGAR, CHOOLAIMEDU, CHENNAI.

¶8

BY ADV K.RAKESH

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 FACT -RCF- BUILDING PRODUCTS LTD. (FRBL) REGISTERED OFFICE AT FACT COCHIN DIVISION CAMPUS, AMBALAMEDU P.O., KOCHI, PIN 682 303. REP.BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL PALAKKAD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, WEST FORT ROAD, KUNATHURMEDU, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678001.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 3265 OF 2021

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner says that, even though a work, contracted by them with the 1^st respondent, was completed as early as on 26.2.2016; and though Ext.P3 - Completion Certificate was issued by the 1^st respondent, along with recommendation for disbursement of the amounts due to them, no action has been taken by the 2^nd respondent until now. They, thus, pray that respondents be directed to pay all eligible amounts due to them for the works covered by Exts.P1 and P2, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶18

The learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent, admitted that the work was completed in the year 2016 and that Ext.P3 - Completion Certificate, had been issued by his client, along with the recommendation to afford payment to the extent eligible. He submitted that, therefore, his client has no further role to play, particularly when the payments have to be honoured by the 2^nd respondent.

¶19

There is no appearance for the 2^nd respondent; and therefore, this Court is not in a position to understand if they have any objection to the reliefs sought for by the petitioner.

¶20

WP(C) NO. 3265 OF 2021

¶21

¶22

That said, as matters now stand, since the 1^st respondent admits that they have issued Ext. P3 - Completion Certificate, as also recommendation for disbursement of eligible amounts to the petitioner, I deem it necessary to allow this Writ Petition, particularly because the work is stated to have been completed as early in February 2016.

¶23

Resultantly, this Writ Petition is allowed; with a direction to the respondents to ensure that all eligible amounts of the petitioner, for the works completed by them as per Exts.P1 and P2 and covered by Ext.P3 Completion Certificate, is disbursed, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶24

Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶25

lsn

¶26

WP(C) NO. 3265 OF 2021

¶27

¶28

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3265/2021

¶29

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶30

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 1.10.2015. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED, 28.9.2015. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLETION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 28.3.2016.

¶31

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶32

TRUE COPY

¶33

P.A TO JUDGE

¶34

LSN

Easy Infra Inc. v. Fact -Rcf- Building Products Ltd. (Frbl)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Easy Infra Inc. v. Fact -Rcf- Building Products Ltd. (Frbl)

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

1. Lekshmy Sreedhar Vs Vasantha

M/S Kent Constructions (Pvt.Ltd) Vs the Executive Engineer

Vincent. P Vs Mohan K.G , (Age and Father’S Name Not Known to the Petitioner)

Unnikrishnan S Vs Murali

K.Kannan Vs the Managing Director

K.Kannan Vs the Kerala Water Authority, Represented by Its Managing Director