Disposed

M/s Pawansut Construction v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC14 Sept 2012CWJC/17254/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a construction firm, sought payment of admitted bills, price escalation, and release of security deposit despite work completion. The court directed the responsible respondent to examine bills and release admissible amounts with interest within three months, failing which personal liability for interest applies.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to examine bills, release admissible amounts with interest within three months, or pay 12% yearly interest from own pocket if funds are not arranged.

M/s Pawansut Construction Vs The State Of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17254 of 2012

¶3

======================================================

¶4

M/S Pawansut Construction through its proprietor namely Abhishek Kumar Singh, son of Tribhuvan Narayan Singh, resident of D-242, Chandrashekhar Nagar Rauza, P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ghazipur (U.P.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar.

¶8

The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Vishveswaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

¶9

The Engineer-in-Chief Road Construction Department, Vishveswaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

¶10

The Chief Engineer, Transport South Bihar Section, Road Construction Department, Patna.

¶11

The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department, Bhojpur Road Circle, Ara.

¶12

The Executive Engineer, Road Division, Buxar.

¶13

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alamdar Hussain, Adv. and Mr. Lal Babu Singh, Adv., AOR No.02671. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishor Aag1

¶15

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 14-09-2012 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this writ

¶17

application may be disposed of taking notice of prayer made in sub-paragraph (i), (ii) and (iii) of paragraph 1 of the writ application.

¶18

The said sub-prayers in the writ application are as

¶19

follows :-

¶20

(i) For commanding the respondents to pay amount of Rs.1,47,06,058/-, admitted and passed as final bill in relation to strengthening and widening of Brahampur Koransarai Road KM. 0 to 24.00 under CRF JOB NUMBER: CRF/BR/200708/42 vide Agreement No.11 SBD of 2009-10. (ii) For Commanding the respondents to pay amount

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.17254 of 2012 (2) dt.14-09-2012

¶22

2 / 3

¶23

of Rs.22,39,964/- as price escalation as per provisions of SBD Agreement, admitted and approved by the concerned respondents in the instant work.

¶24

(iii) For a direction to the respondents to release the security deposit deducted from the running on account bills and final bill in the instant work.

¶25

He submits that, in spite of completion of work to the satisfaction of the respondents and submission of bill long back, the amount has not been paid to the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner is entitled for statutory interest on the due amount for which he may be allowed to agitate.

¶26

It goes without saying that, if the petitioner has completed the work as per the contract agreement and to the satisfaction of the respondents, he is entitled for payment of his bills and the respondents have no authority to withhold the same indefinitely without any valid and cogent reasons. It may be made clear that, since petitioner claims to have done the work in terms of the agreement and/or under valid orders/authorization by the competent authorities, paucity of fund or non-allotment of fund also cannot and should not be an excuse for keeping his/its bills pending.

¶27

In the circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the concerned respondent, responsible for payment of the amount of bills of the petitioner, to examine his/its

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.17254 of 2012 (2) dt.14-09-2012

¶29

3 / 3

¶30

bills in the light of work done by him/it and ensure release of admissible amount of the bills including any statutory interest to the petitioner positively within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if necessary, by arranging fund for the same, failing which, the said respondent shall be liable to pay an interest on the amount, at the rate of 12% compoundable yearly, from his own pocket. In case, the said respondent finds that the amount of bill or any part thereof is not payable to the petitioner, he shall communicate the same to the petitioner in specific terms, assigning reasons thereof, within that very period. In that event, petitioner shall be at liberty to seek his remedy in accordance with law before an appropriate forum and claim an adjudication in respect of his entitlement of the said amount with interest.

¶31

Arvind/-

¶32

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

M/s Pawansut Construction v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Pawansut Construction v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

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

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.andOR

Amit Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Mohan Pd. Yadav Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Sunni Kumari and Co. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.