Disposed

M/s Shaligram Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC22 Feb 2013CWJC/2328/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two common writ applications as infructuous after the State withdrew earlier rescission. A direction was issued for expeditious payment of pending bills to the petitioner in accordance with the specific clauses of the contract.

What did the court decide?

Applications disposed of as infructuous with direction to respondents to pay pending bills expeditiously as per contract clauses.

M/s Shaligram Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.2298 of 2013 (3) dt.22-02-2013

¶2

	IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2298 of 2013 ======================================================
	M/S Shaligram Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ======================================================
	with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2328 of 2013 ======================================================
	M/S Shaligram Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER
3	22-02-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State in both the cases. Both the writ applications relate to the same petitioner and have been filed on account of the rescission of the contract in both the cases.

¶3

In the supplementary affidavits filed in both the cases, it is stated that by a common order dated 18.2.2013 rescindment has been withdrawn and the petitioner has been given time till 31.3.2013 to complete the work.

¶4

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a number of bills of the petitioner with respect to the present contracts are pending and unless the bills are paid in terms of the contractual

¶5

Patna High Court CWJC No.2298 of 2013 (3) dt.22-02-2013

¶6

stipulations, it would be difficult for the petitioner to complete the work by 31.3.2013 as per the undertaking submitted by him to the Department and the order dated 18.3.2013 issued thereafter.

¶7

Learned counsel for the State does not oppose the prayer of the petitioner for payment of bills but submits that any payment can only be made in terms of Clauses 6, 7 and 8 of the Clauses of Contract in the S.B.D.

¶8

In the aforesaid circumstances, both the writ applications are disposed of as infructuous with the direction that the respondents must ensure that payments are made to the petitioner expeditiously with respect to pending bills in terms of Clauses 6, 7 and 8 and other relevant provisions of the S.B.D.

¶9

V.P.Sinha/-

¶10

(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)

M/s Shaligram Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Shaligram Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Hari Om Construction Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Satish Kumar Sinha Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandra Deo Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Maa Bindhyavasani Fuels Bharat Petroleum Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

M/s Shaligram Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.