Disposed

M/S Ganesh Construction Company v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jan 2009CWP/226/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition claimed payment for executed construction work and security deposit refund by the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana. The court disposed of the matter without hearing merits, directing the local body to consider the claim within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana to consider the petitioner's claim in the legal notice dated 24.03.2008 and release payments within two months if found entitled.

M/S Ganesh Construction Company Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2009) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P NO. 226 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 09.01.2009

¶3

Ganesh Construction Co.

¶4

...Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and another

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT

¶9

Present : Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

¶11

The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to make payment to the petitioner of Rs.23,46,193/along with interest.

¶12

As per the petitioner's case, the Municipal Corporation, Ludhina - respondent No.2 allotted the construction work of street(s) to the petitioner which has already been satisfactorily executed. It is further averred that after measurements of the work executed at the spot, an entry in the measurement book has been duly recorded at Serial No. 2471 and a bill of Rs. 23,15,193/- has also been prepared for payment to the petitioner. The actual payment, however, is stated to have been with held for no valid reason. In addition to the aforesaid amount, the petitioner claims refund of Rs.31,000/which was deposited by him as a security on 16.03.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a legal notice

¶13

-2-

¶14

C.W.P NO. 226 OF 2009

¶15

dated 24.03.2008 (Annexure P-3) was served upon the respondents calling upon them to release the due payment. However, the legal notice has also not been responded so far.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merits of the claim contained in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana to consider the claim raised by the petitioner in the legal notice dated 24.03.2008 (Annexure P-3) and if the petitioner is found entitled to certain payments on account of the work executed by it, to release the said payments within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶17

JANUARY 09, 2008 shalini

¶18

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

M/S Ganesh Construction Company v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ganesh Construction Company v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhmander Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

G.R. Builders and Contractors Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar Vs HUDA and Anr.

Kailash Co-Op Labour and Const. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Dilbagh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.