Disposed

M/s. Gaurav Contracts Co. v. The Singareni Colleries Company Limited

Telangana HC11 Apr 2022WP/6697/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed regarding the enforcement of a contract and non-return of bank guarantees. The court directed the petitioner to pay dues towards HSD oil consumption and provide a fresh bank guarantee for a security amount, upon which the respondents would release the petitioner's withheld bank guarantees.

What did the court decide?

Directing the petitioner to pay dues of Rs.97,77,622.17 and furnish a bank guarantee of Rs.87,43,891.26, upon which the respondents must release the petitioner's withheld bank guarantees.

M/s. Gaurav Contracts Co. Vs The Singareni Colleries Company Limited — Telangana HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶2

I,4ONDAY ,THE^{ELEVENTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY TWO}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEKREDDY}

¶5

WRIT PETITIO N^{NO:6697 0F 2022}

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

[rrl/s. Gaurav Contracts^{co, A Partnership Firm registered under lndia Partnership} Act, Office at No.122,^{"pij"tr-a C"rpi[x, Statio"nRoad, Bhuj - Kutch (Gujarat} State) 370001. Rep.by^{,4r.RenangiPenchalaiah}

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The Singareni Colleries Company Limited, A Company^incorpotated .under^the Conrpan-ies Act, 1 956 Having its Regd. Off ice at Kothagudem Colelgies50710'l , Bhadradri Kothagudem District^(T.S.), Rep. by its chairman^and l,4anaging Director.

¶11

2 The General [,4anager, The Singareni Colleries Company Limited, (KTK OCll), thupalpalli Area, Jayashankar Bhupalpalli District (T.S.)

¶12

The General [,4anager (CtV), The Singareni Colleries Compan v Limited, Corporate Contract IVlanagement Department, PO Kot hagudem Colieries - 507 10'1 , Bhadradri Kothagudem District (T.S.)

¶13

4 Jfe frqe^c!^{Oflicer,The Singareni Cotleries Companv Limited, Kakatiya} $,gli,^{O9-Ll (KTKOC-il),BFpL Area, Bhupatpatii, Jdyashankar Bhupatpaili} District, (T.S.)

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Articre 226 of ihe constitution of rndia prayrng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction, more parricularry a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ decraring the inaction of the respondents in resolving various contracl and n turn camins ,, ,:ffi::; ffi,.,;:JlT:I.::ill1:1,:1*-,.J: petitioner vide Letter Ref.BHp/FAD/B,rs/2022r165, dated 13101/2022 as being unconscionabre, arbitrary, unconstitution a r and in vioration of the express terms of the Agreement between the petitioner and the respondents vide order No.

¶16

7600006927,m^{dated 16/08/2017and consequentiallyset aside the same and} direct the respondents^{to resolve various issues raised by the petitionerln terms of} the order dated^{16/08/2017 and thereafter settlethe final bill of the petitionerand} alsotoreturntheBankGuaranteevideSl.No.lggBTTdated2slogl2ol9foravalue of Rs.3,01,68,000.00^{and Sl No '199845'dated O5lO2t2O21 for a valueof} Rs.3,0l,68,000.00issuedbycorporationBank,Bhujfurnishedbythepetitioner towards^{performance and rereaseof retention money by accepting bank guarantee} for the value^{of Rs 1 ,72'85''145'49being equivalent to the claim of the} respondents.

¶17

lA NO:^{2 OF 2022}

¶18

Petition^{underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition,the High coudmay be pleased to stav} the operation^{of the impugned Letter in Ref No BHP/FAD/ Bills/2022l165dated 13-} o1_2ozzissued^{by respondent No.3 pending disposalof the present writ Petition'}

IAN^O:3oF2022

Between:

'"*";3i!fl

f^{f#Jrii"il"'#:Hh:""r.."'qli#?r+'r:["t'18$::i:"'""}

¶23

'll%ffi:,'$,Yi?331j;]13.?'l-'i'il'?$':1"ffi?'?ff?+timited'(KrKoc.

¶24

'#;.&'iH#qti-'d-f#ffi,i.f, il''ir"',**'i+.BBp?r'vnug.,0"*

¶25

^f*1,lJ"J"q"i,-'".,[f^{rttiiuitt'::l'H'\n3';5[:#$':"#H::,-}

¶26

AND apartnershipF,'S.l:.ni'E:",t"81",:'lt'8t:f,^it"'ii}'i'

¶27

[ii$i$ilfi"{litnft]

¶28

R3;?.3i$,l?l;',;;; RE.P.NDENT.

¶29

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedin the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the High Coud may be pleased to} vacate the interim^{order dated 08/02/2022 passed in W P No 6697 of 2022.}

¶30

IA NO: 1 OF²⁰²²

¶31

PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in^{supportof the petition,the High Court may be pleased to} restrain the respondents^{from invoking Bank Guarantees vide Sl.No.'199877 dated} 25-09-2019foravalueofRs.3,01,68'000.00andSl.No.199845dated05-02-2021 for a value of^{Rs.3,01,68,000.00 issuedby corporation Bank,Bhujfurnishedby} thepetitionertowardsperformanceandreleaseofretentionmoney'pending disposal of the^{present Writ Petition}

¶32

+Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI^{A DEEPTHI}

¶33

Counsel for^{the Respondents: J SREENIVASA RAO(SC FOR SINGARENI C)} The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶34

THE HON'BLE SRI ]USTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶35

WRIT PETITION No.6697 ol 2022

¶36

ORDER:

¶37

Heard the learned counsel for the^petitioner and Sri l. Srinivasa Rao, the learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Colleries Company Limited appearing^for the respondents. With their consent, the Writ^{Petition is disposedof at thestage} of admission itsetf.

¶38

Challenging the inaction of the respondents in not^{resolvingvarious} contractual issues raised by the^petitioner and^{riot returningthe Bank Guarantees} furnishEd by it, the^petitioner has^{filed the presentwrit petition.}

¶39

Learned counsel for the^petitioner has^{stated that on the one hand the} respondents are claiming that the^petitioner is^due an^amountof Rs.1,72,85,145.49^paisa, but, on the othei', they^{are withholding the Bank} Guararitees furnished by the^{petitioner vide Sl.No.199877 dated25,09.2019 for} the value of Rs.3,01,68,000/- and Sl.No.199845^{dated 05.02.2021for the valueof} Rs,3,01;68,000/-.

¶40

The learned Standing Counsel appearing^{on behalfof the respondentshas} stated that as^{per the reconciliation of the bills,. the petitioneris due an amount} ofRs.43,2l,777.68paisaandRs.54,55,844.49paisatowardstheHSDoil consumption. Insofar^{as the penalty of 15o/o is concerned,the unexcavated} balance amount^{will be Rs.87,43,891.26 paisa, and in case, the petitiOner pays} the amounts specified^{above for HSDoil consumption and gives a BankGuarantee} for Rs.87,43,891.26^{paisapending resolution of any dispute that may be raisedby}

¶41

¶42

the petitioner, the respondents are willing to release the Bank Guarantees^dated 25.09.2019 and 05.02.2021 furnished by the^petitioner.

¶43

The learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has stated that the petitioner is willing to pay the amounts of Rs.54,55,844.49 paisa and Rs.43,21,777.68 paisa towards consumption of HSD oil if some time is given to it.

¶44

Having regard to the above made submissions, without prejudice to the rights or contentions Iikely to be raised by the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to pay the total amount of Rs.97,77,622.17 paisa (Rs.54,55,844.49 + and Rs.43,21,777.68) in two equal instalments. The first instalment shall be paid within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the balance 50o/o of the amount shall be paid within a period of six weeks thereof, The petitioner is also directed to furnish a Bank Guarantee for an amount of Rs.87,43,891.26 paisa. On such Bank Guarantee being furnished by the petitioner, the official respondents shall release the two Bank Guarantees furnished by the petitioner^yrde Sl.No.199877 dated 25.09.2019 for the value of Rs.3,01,68,000/- and Sl.No.199845 dated 05.02.2021 for the value of Rs.3,01,68,000/-.

¶45

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶46

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall

¶47

be no order as to costs.

¶48

SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGIS}RAR ,TRUE COPYII L SECTION OFFICER

¶49

To,

¶50

The Singareni Colleries Company Limited, A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 Having its Regd. Office at Kothagudem Colelgies507101 , Bhadradri Kothagudem District (T.S.), Rep. by its chairman and lvlanaging Director.

¶51

The General lVlanager, The Singareni Colleries Company Limited, (KTK OCll), Bhupalpalli Area, Jayashankar Bhupalpalli District (T.S.)

¶52

3. -	TheGeneral^{Manager(CNn),TheSingareniColleriesC9!Pgny} [iniit",i,corporatedoniract'ManagementDepartment,PoKothagudem cJrleri"J-doztol,^{BhadradriKothagudemDistrict (TS )}
4.	TheProiectofficer,TheSingareniColleriesCompanyLimited,Kakatiya Khani,OC-ll^{(KTKOC-ll),BHPLArea,BhupalpalliJayasnanKarBnupalparrr} District, (T.S.)
5. 6.	OneCCto^{SRl.A DEEPTHIAdvocateIOPUC]} oneCCtoSRl.JSREEN
7.	TwoCDCoPies
B.	One Spare^CoPY
N/t\4A	,x\|
SW

HIGH COURT

DATED:1^110412022

ORDER

'1 g 5-rAl E o
(a
2 1APRz(fl? i

¶57

WP.No.6697^{of 2022}

¶58

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶59

tr
u'

M/s. Gaurav Contracts Co. v. The Singareni Colleries Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Gaurav Contracts Co. v. The Singareni Colleries Company Limited

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

Gareeb Guide (Voluntary Organization) and another Vs Government of Telangana and 2 Others

Sherla Saritha Vs The State of Telangana

Vadla Gnaneshwari Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Sri Sajja Rajasekhar Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

A.Balaiah Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and 2 Other

Syed Nemathulla Vs The State of Telengana