Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Augustine J.Chalil vs M/S.Lakshadweep Development Corporation Ltd.

Augustine J.Chalil vs M/S.Lakshadweep Development Corporation Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 05, 2024
~6 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1314032

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/40952/2016

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Augustine J.Chalil

Respondent

M/S.Lakshadweep Development Corporation Ltd.

Excerpt

.....the statementy ofdetails of pending bill submitted by the 3rd petitioner ext.p4 true copies of the statements/ bills submitted by the 4th petitioner before the 1st respondent showing the details of the pending bills along with the covering letter dated ext.p5 true copy of the judgment dated files of the hon'ble high court of kerala ext.p6 true copy of the communiction dated to the 1st petitioner ext.p6(a) true copy of the communiction dated to the 2nd petitioner ext.p6(b) true copy of the communiction dated to the 3rd petitioner ext.p6(c) true copy of the communiction dated to the 4th petitioner ext.p7 true copy of the reply dated ext.p8 true copy of the reply dated ext.p9 true copy of the reply dated ext.p10 true copy of the reply dated ext.p11 true copy of the communication datedrespondent to the 1st petitioner ext.p11(a) true copy of the communication dated respondent to the 2nd petitioner ext.p11(b) true copy of the communication dated respondent to the 3rd petitioner ext.p11(c) true copy of the communication dated respondent to the 4th petitioner ext.p12 true copy of the representation dated petitioner before the 1st respondent. ext.p13 true copy of the representation dated petitioner before the 1st respondent. ext.p14 true copy of the representation dated petitioner before the 1st respondent. ext.p15 true copy of the representation dated petitioner before the 1st respo2dent. ext.p16 true copy of the judgment dated ext.p17 ture copy of the order dated 2/6/2016 issued by the expert commitee constuted by the 1st respondent ext.p18 ture copy of the invoice dated the 4th petitioner to the 1st respondent ext.p18(a) true copy of the work done certificate dated 29/1/2011 issued to the 4th petitioner.ext.p18(b) true copy of the work order bearing no.kh4426 dated 7/7/2011 issued by the 4th petitioner by the 1st respondent ext.p18(c) true copy of the cheque bearing no.489982.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1946 PETITIONERS:

1 AUGUSTINE J.CHALIL AGED 64 YEARS S/O.C.M.JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, M/S.ALCOS, SHOP NO.3, BELOW SOUTH OVER BRIDGE, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 016. 2 P.J.CYRUS S/O.JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, M/S.ST.JOSEPH'S ENGINEERING WORKS, CC 17/1611, MUNDAMVELI SANTHOM, COCHIN 682 507. 3 MR.NARENDERANATH GOPALAN S/O.GOPALAN NAIR, M/S.SENSATION PEST CONTROL SERVICES, 35/3030-A1, VYLASSERRY ROAD PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN 682025. 4 MR.K.A.XAVIER AGED 47 YEARS S/O.K.V.ANTONY, PROPRIETOR, M/S.BOLGATTY MARINE, BY ADV SRI.A.G.ADITYA SHENOY

RESPONDENTS: 1 M/S.LAKSHADWEEP DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI, LAKSHADWEEP 682 555. BY ADVS. SRI.MANU.S, SCGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP Sajith Kumar V - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

1. Petitioners are contractors engaged by the 1st respondent - Corporation for doing maintenance and repairing works of the vessels operated by the Corporation.

2. According to the petitioners they have completed the works, but the 1st respondent refused to disburse the contract payments citing flimsy reasons.

3. They had earlier approached this Hon’ble Court by filing

WP(C) No.1290/2013 and this Court directed the 1 st respondent to communicate the defects in the documents submitted by the petitioners within two weeks and permitted them to rectify the defects.

4. According to the petitioners inspite of rectifying the

defects the 1st respondent did not release the amounts due to them. Petitioners approached this Court again by filing WP(C) No.30669/2015 and this Court passed Ext.P16

judgment directing the 1st respondent to honour the final bills

if the petitioners cure the defects within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the said judgment. With respect to work done without Work Orders, this Court directed to constitute a Committee to find out whether the petitioner has undertaken any such work, the petitioner had been compensated to the extent recommended by the Committee. It is made clear that petitioner shall not hereafter undertake any work without any written Work Order from the 3rd respondent.

5. The Committee constituted as per the directions from this

Court in Ext P16 considered the issue and Ext.P17 is the Minutes of the Committee dated 02/06/2016 in which it is stated that even though opportunities are given to the petitioners for substantiating their claim, the petitioners did not avail such opportunities. The Committee also found that the Work Done Certificates produced by the petitioners cannot be treated as genuine and acceptable in the absence of the name and CDC number of the person who had signed as ‘Master/Chief Officer’ of the Vessels.

6. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in similar circumstances the 1st respondent has accepted Work Done Certificates even without CDC number and name of the Master of the vessel.

7. The learned standing counsel for the 1 st respondent

invited my attention to the relevant clause which is extracted in Paragraph Number 8 of the Counter affidavit which mandates that Work Order and Work Done Certificates are mandatory for processing the bills after completion of the contracts.

8. Ext.P16 judgment indicates that this Court was also of

the view that the Work Order is a mandatory document. That is why this Court directed the petitioners not to do any work thereafter without Work Order. Ext.P17 shows that ample opportunities are given to the petitioner. Accordingly, since those documents are essential for processing the bill, I do not find any infirmity to Ext.P17. There is nothing on record to show that the 1st respondent has accepted Work Done Certificates without CDC number and name of the Master of the vessel in similar circumstances.

9. Therefore, this writ petition fails and is dismissed accordingly. Sd/- M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE sms APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40952/2016 PETITIONER EXHIBITS

   EXT.P1                 TRUE   COPY   OF    THE    LETTER    DATED
   EXT.P2                 TRUE   COPY   OF    THE    LETTER    DATED
   EXT.P3                 TRUE COPIES OF THE STATEMENTY OF

DETAILS OF PENDING BILL SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER EXT.P4 TRUE COPIES OF THE STATEMENTS/ BILLS SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE PENDING BILLS ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER DATED EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED FILES OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICTION DATED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER EXT.P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICTION DATED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER EXT.P6(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICTION DATED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER EXT.P6(C) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICTION DATED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED

   EXT.P9                 TRUE   COPY     OF    THE    REPLY    DATED
   EXT.P10                TRUE   COPY     OF    THE    REPLY    DATED
   EXT.P11                TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED

RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER EXT.P11(A) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER EXT.P11(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER EXT.P11(C) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH PETITIONER EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P15 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPO2DENT. EXT.P16 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED EXT.P17 TURE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/6/2016 ISSUED BY THE EXPERT COMMITEE CONSTUTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P18 TURE COPY OF THE INVOICE DATED THE 4TH PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P18(A) TRUE COPY OF THE WORK DONE CERTIFICATE DATED 29/1/2011 ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER.

EXT.P18(B) TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER BEARING NO.KH4426 DATED 7/7/2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P18(C) TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE BEARING NO.489982 DATED 15/9/2011 DRAWN ON ICIICI BANK ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial