High Court Karnataka High Court

The Executive Engineer vs K Gundappa S/O Kantappa Kalgi on 16 February, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The Executive Engineer vs K Gundappa S/O Kantappa Kalgi on 16 February, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
..i.

219' THE H263 com? 0;' KARNATAKA ~..

flIRCIII'I' BENCH AT GULBAR{7£§§ % ~ 5   _

BATES "}i'fiES THE 25TH my 5:31? §»*EB;<L§%;RY;'%:20Q9%% ' ~ k

Bamrég  . T? '

"£"HE E-§{")N'Ei.E MR.J::sTy:;E Rm B,1 Gi€{§5;2§_:'P;.ED I)Y A A '

R.F'.é_;. Ns.1{{§§3»,:/_§&QQ? (SJ§.__ 

BE'1"%EN:

E, "$316 Eixccutivé Engi£1€:€r,'---- _ "  AV 
'WED IPC: Fsivisioxé NQ..:4;    V'
Hebha1',ffq: iiiimtfagsaf, _ j_ . 
23131;: <f}ui§.i:-::zfgé;é.59'1»'2§-f}:' '

2. 'E'h::+'Chi6"§;' E3fig:'l:ae€:r,''--- "
1§Jif€D_ Irrigaatigrz. Prnjéct ."?, 00:,

 Appefiamg
{B32 Sri, S3' Aspafii, Advacate} 

éfii



AND:

1.

K. Gundappa S/0 Kantappa Kalgi, ~ ;_.

Age: 31 years, 005:: Glass E Contracmr, ”
R/0 Hfiéo. Z?/111G1f33C/A,

E\I<=:hru Gun}, Gu1ba:{*ga-585 1a'1.»—-.¢

2. The State of Kainataka A’ 3
Deputy C0mmi$$ionez’,’ ”

{§i.1ibarga–385 18 1.

‘ L; g _. . Ildents
I39

{By Sri. Ameet Kafiiar iT)€s;}:1p3:1dé;~AdVomt€ for E 1.
and 313%.. SS. Kummgrz, ‘v£}A:for_’R~Vi£.}. ”

‘E’H§S §E;§:s:}LA:R §r§§§.sIj ‘2%1?*E AL’ ES FELED UNDER
S3(;”{“§GN 94:5 G1}? :::,§*.«c: AGAENSFVTHE JUDGMENT’ AND
DEGREE ;3s:*:’E::;.V-;1ism;’2_,–:30@_7 PASSES {N 0.8. NC}. 125/2905
GN THE 1?ILE:%:_’:;:)1r«’ ‘I7’§«iE} ‘:5: AQDITIONAL <::W:L JUDGE (SR.

3VN.;.,..%.§:;L£aA;é&::.;;§, fJ.'ARTL?"–~£§.E3{3REEING THE SUE'? FGR
REcc}vER*§*{:;;: :§::';:;:<:E:§?.~~.__ _ —

':':~§':";:v':._V%%:–<m <:Cé:«;i1s-;..¥:§ 02% ma AER/E§8S£O.¥\E TEES my:
'mf; i')-(EUR? M3138 THE mggawrzeaz

wnemxr
* V€*i'§::%1d%¢::*¢£;dan:s in <13. Na. :25/2995 aggrieveci by

iié jiiégirifint am d€Ci"'€€i' dated 2%,€}2.i2€¥G'? 0? the {ff

.% %'Aa;:;g;ma: am: Jzicige {Samar Qivisiozisi Guibarga, have

'p:'?€ i:'@:':*€d {his fzffii 3.9333}. g

W

2. “§”1”;€ piaimiff a Ciassai contractor entrusted with

civi} €{}f1S’£I’ilCii€)i’1 wider sight separate teIideI*&(}.Vi*£,tj:*;1_s of

W{}i’§{, an Cfiifipifitifiii, saught refund of _E;*;1.?I1éSt’.j’;’%Jii)’::é3?.V

Depogifi {E’M.D.) and Fina} Sechugfity »

my ciaims were raised against the frgjk’ bi fizschiof

‘abs tzzrrzas cf the c0Ii'{ra.Ct’:é:§,_’s:; as ‘€i:::rr»::::f.1ai191; -d;€.:p0sits,.L’

by a aemand in Wriijilg dated’»3Q’;€}5.2§(}G’2.,Ex,:§P-w 1. The
auiharizzées 11120236 apfirhpriaiéig . E.’;s§<-_:j{:u'::i'v'6 Engnear

rfisponééd t{:_r ' the 3':i<§i.ia§é: -W;".;'Z§f§:€n repiy dated

the }3}2!.iIfiZiff by anothsr

rzoticfirjazcfi 'EX. P-:5, thozzgh in £113 nature

fif _::.. zffijeéfgzfez' ~é;#;e1.ig*li{: :0 deny {ha ailegatians in the

.' V. *Tfi§3"f3fiEéI;é5f' the éfiffiiidafii "£0 mafia paymeni as

"{Zi£iif1'}..é{i, .dé$p,i.'if.~€ reminders, ifié ta '£223 insiitutiorz cf 0.8.

gm. 3.2~5j%%2S@5 on 39x:25.29e:5 {gr remvery of Rs.

n :kT,3§;;2::;%:3 ,1» mag aha E5133' and $.33. far five items of

-.._%;=;:”:3:”§«{$ ail seziai $03′ 34 ami 8 as 36: 012′; if} the

= ..«-Zéiézsézxufa :0 Ex. 9-} aim} intarest sf R3. ‘?:’2,9SGj-» for ihfi

M

-24..

period fmna 3a}.%.2Cm to 30.932005 Rs.

i>,O?,980/ ~ and current interest at 18% per ~

3. The appaflants herein-I9;rraignf;d ‘ j

filed wxitten statemant .

deziyirzg the allegations V ‘nftjliowixig
pieasz mat the suitvwas n{}{“t:$,:i;1’fi1;abié’as 516 piaintifi
dici net make a Engneer, WRD
Emigaticen as required Igy
ciause 259″‘ /12.3.0. would be
retmfieé -‘of the F1313} biii in respect cf
me W}; :$§:t; ¥g§§2a:nt1fl”; that final ban was not

s’:3.ff?;$§t”§:€:é 33:16′ ‘as Ei”;aI1ding may 0f reccifis from 8133

. $35: –ai1-{fiber ‘W§1€f1 the maasurement hooks 0f’ ‘aha

~.3%.:w§’%§$ 2{%*€::€7A’T;€4:fit tracsfi; {.33} bills. weuid be submitted as

$0792; 9&3 itié saié racards are fraceci; after upassixzg ef the

n§33?ii.$ Viize E.§?eiaB.,fI?.S.S. wilfi be rfieased; tha: the

has 2%’: axczcuteci Sfiififi af the vmrks Eenéered

V H ” and faiieé ta Carmpiaie thfi huiléiag *sa?i{.%1i1f1 the fitipuiaied

paréad; ‘aha Qaaiity ilfifitffii §iv§s.i€;r: has :30: approved

M

the qzaaiity £31′ consirmcfian and; iasfiy £113′: as the

aiaferzdant N33 Execmtive Engineer resiéas a€V_j.€S¢TdA.am,

{ha Trig} cam has :10 territeriai jurisdicticifi’

suit.

4. From the reccard it is Jvthétfi:

Enginmr Dflffifidaflt ‘filed “ygt’ Wxiiéritteri’

atatement withaut “§ia?;?s:»=__a13ci an V£’i8.{)’2.2€)G6

fiiad a meme wifi1{%§¥”_;_’ ‘a w zgtafing that the

written Siafififiifilfifi Dfif«éi3§a§1i§’E;To. 3 be p»e1’:.:11if:edT

£20 ‘£36 Wii€f;{i’ra§i:v’};i.__ in-.jT’j*:i”ié3.__ ‘cf the eariier Written

statfimenffl an 28.02.2306 took 011
§’ec:0rd %;:?1 €331éi1zé’;’ . ” V’

“f1’§a,_§___i”1{3urt in the premise sf pléadings :23′

‘ _fi*;:e §_;y§r’§;%€:s framed the fafiawifig five issues:

3} §F§%?j£i5étE1€r the fiajziiiii’ §FG*$.?’€$ 3113: he sompiazsé
” 3%} tbs warks azitrusted is him under &1mexure~
‘A’ aflé as pg? the terms sf the mntrasi wiih ihe

deferiéarzm as afiiageé?

M

plaintiff was antsitled 119 {ha refund of EMJ).

ané accorciirzgly answered issue:-, No.2 in afi’§i’Bia£i§*ej’. 4_

With regard to £116 issue as to” v;hetE:1er_. 4 S1_’iit:’®’?’iS ‘ ‘

barrad by the }jmif;af:ion: as
No.3, the Trial Court i:h¢ «$12 the
premise of the avez’fl1g;1ts ii’i ‘statéjrxzent that
ihé flnal bili was Ilfiig measurement
books 2&*eI%;~vr1:1é$i §31a{:%d.g ;3.s to whether the
gflaintiff “:.§:i’a;irr3ed in the: suit, the
was entitisci to recover
Rs. 2A,’5{}”i?:.’§§«§;}:’.’.i:1Lerest at 6% par mmun} as

agggifiéi 315-; A. for 18% pa. ané accardimgly

Na. 4. in cenclusion the Tris} Csuri:

. a::c:e’e:a§%%AM:11¢L,%sL::: of tha pzamafi” in part by the impugned

_§z;i{‘§gIr:Ae:i’E;””311d decrée.

Having hsard the Eeamad 68311881 far tha

pafiieg, perused ‘£316 gieadirzgs, {ha matfirial on recerd

{ha évidenca E50431, am}. azzé eiasumentary and examizzed

the judgment and éécree impugned; the questimrz, for

%?:%

“E-

decigiaxx making is “‘§é’h€”9*.:;he:* Er: tbs

ci:1.*€:u1;.1staI::ces cf ‘aha case, the Trig} Qeuzit’ issaaéjiistgiiééi,’

in {§(‘i'(,1’I’Ei€iE}g ‘£116 321%: 311$ di1*:_>:::¥§.:}g d.t5f{§£:’:ié:11t.S pay 1. ”

Rs. 2,(}?,9GGj— with fuiura ir.{§:<:r§3%$t""Tat

{mm rim éate cf Sui': iii} ré.ai§sa§i0ri'E'"

8. U:1dQu§:e«:iij’»,:.__tha;§}é1i£:*:4a{%:3:f111ez1%§S’A€iisC§0se that
$36 piaéntifi” was the sucgefislféfii in mgpect sf 8
s€par:;35t.e {€:::a:§.£}T*$ :=;_ji’azi; — >éi*¢%% fieated by the

éiefz-éiifiariis é;}:1.~.=:: tgxéécuiion of 8 separaia

wariég c+:;:1%;*3;{;i;-_ “‘*E’§i<~3;jéé*–:EVs' I38 éiispmta filai tbs §}3,3i§'1tiff
§€§}::)sE':€:<§_ V'i}1{:vV"§§}§.E};'§'g"%B $.«::'ward$ Each 0%" $316 werks

e§a§§;*€2$;'Es:{i ii? 'ghérggw f§'E'3€ facéi. is {hat {ha dézféfidaats did

» 1:35;: ciaréfig agaiiisi €316 E3§s€§f§%'S$ refunéabié :0

H the ififflifi sf aeritract siiher far deiay

i:;:' §§r%§&a{§§ of "ierms sf the caniracts. Enciisputabiy

" ~ i:";{5'ii;he%* fiifi giairziiifi' 1191* {ha ésfenéants piaced before

g:<3u§"t {ha Wark aamtracis axfiauiesi betwaezz the §az*ties.

H '§"h€ piaiflfiff claims as have aamgfiefi with 31% 316

issntragtiuai abiigaiiofifi Ufifiifir' {he workg cetrztmci

<=:r3.ti"{ling}*1im to refund of the EMI}/ 931;: ma

alleges that the defendants faVi1'(§ f

of the cantract, the f{)u1”;:}

far the Suit.

9. Per cox3tr3..’Lité_is 01′ Q VtVl’éeV VcV1efendaI1ts
in the Written state:1u3V;.f:§:’:V t?§~;§%” vicrlated the
temtns of completion cf the
1fé.isié’:§a;V'{1ispute with {“116 Chief
fig” 29 of the contract and at
the $éL::;;_é’ the measzlrement books in

resypergg aft’ t%1::f §i%0r§{s .car1*ie<:i cm: by the piaifltiff were

thaéérz the drawing up 0f a {ma} bifls the

EZME and PS1} vmuid be relfiased.

3 From a bare mmsal of the afcsresaicl

“§;eie:_§gdiiégS of the parties, what: is manifast is that hath

yaxfies piaaed mfiansfi ‘apex: tins terms 0f’ the

a3Q.m£.:”acts in sugggport sf their respactive gieas. If} 0:11:21′

wariis. the §§ai:1fifi”was reqzlired 1:0 prove tbs cempleéion

N

.42..’

‘k paafliicuiars of the Contracts in a tabular coluflm, more

paiticulariy the éafie crf Comrnénfieznent, stipulateci
pariad of campletion sf warks, due date fer Qcifipiefion

of WOFK, actual data of conapletion, rr1at€1’ia;§S'(i4f1V;1$_’§L§fi:1A€::i,

depariinaixiai issued materials, balanca–.§{§::’ >

and aha .*aII1ourr’:; recoverafiég $339111′–TTtfia§”*-Cofitfaaétfir.

,ém:1exure-B :0 E:~:.P£5(21) -are f}”:s.,;e rzvsffl

ccmtraets, sufaject matter , f:f::§ S’:.ii:«.:Ee:iioI3§§ with the
pariicularfi of the 2in:{§L1;1£s ix)’ as EMD and FSD.
E2. Th’-:3 did not have the
xI1ea.$.2rs’§1;:ti%.;tfi *£;?_1e_iI* cusmdy, :10? prepared the
fmai _ if :_iTs«.. :é<i',J it is net knawm as ts ézow

E:~;;E~""Ej:'Tfé{a§ aw-a5s 'gsgraézarsgfi E3}? 'she Executive E;f":gir:€e:_r:' E': is

" ssjrzfifi af ST érawirig up 0? 3 $1113} '$133 after'

»§_J.€$?;'Bf€fi1€EiS, it E3 fixer; afzsne pcssibla to

a$~:–:a'0§§5si2 :'tE":e daieg 3f campietiam of the xsmriis, {ha

.A amausits reseverabia and tha balance 1}18.{€£'i3}S to be

""V'VV§3€Li}m€d« Thfiraforfi, the makiflg of an abstract

furnishing maifiriai particulars (3? the camract, :33. my

A. E?'
M

J2.

api;:.i”?s-. §’u4s’ii3’§<:C3::;_'i:1

acceptmg Ex.E'15{a} as ad'f;1é:':§sib1%-s:€}i:£;en:§é' t{§_2v€i¢cr?ee

suzii. if E:~=;.P15(a} :5 a<:ci3§fi:¢'}ci:_';2a§;u_» avidanm,
fizen the piaiifijfi' za?as;V:'req':;j§?§éL% 'fi'&V%'v';'3.éV§}z'-.. 332,6 1,561/'~ 63$
recovarabla 4L':£".lfl§€}" which waulé
amaurzt «sf '§5'i6'W of the matter,
the accepting E3:~:.P15{a) as
ad}"§'i:§i5$Si'§.}}{i €*:fi€i§}."1{§§.':,:_: " rficord its findings and
c<}§:a}u$ia§;s .V0's}€:*;1f."V*i'.;*r'§é: Eviareaver the zzonlpiefion

.316 warks ezatrusteé, strietiy in

as}: ' aihamsisé ::::f

' ,,;1?<:{:31*€§j;an*::<;:43A"'z%.%ii.%1 826 §1€I"'§}[iS., rsquired fiilihfii" part}; to

";3:=%:_*:d":1c€: –"£:::'1%;§ mark the centracta in evidarzcag in the

hsa. $e:.;";f::zr§: sf the cimfiiracig the Trial Caurt, was not

~ §:;:s:j;:':ea in canciudifig am: the giainfifi' has mmpzema

amréis in "E€'i"iIiS cf fim contrast. Wins {he fizzdifig an

issua 3%,} is paervarge anti miis .f0rir}§€rfere:1g3a.

} MK
$9/3!

.33..

£3. 30 3139 thai the missing 2:2e3;s11:’;:£;1é;1§i_:i§::§§:§i:$

and the £101″: iirawing up :35 the fu”1ai’.bfi,§Sf’v.;eVr;ii%;i¢s»figs V._

Triai Sam”: is draw a presii=mpf=i{S;:§:? {;?£.§3e ‘

piaizztiff over 61$ camgzing -933;?

Refuné of EM}?/§’S§ in “z=£§:¢1}ai business
itranaasiiesrls i3 0;1E;}-‘ — .aff§e;1r’é.V: :i.s7*:2fe:’§’A:.(i§$s;§:’u1 compieticn of
the warks en?_::12st€;§~~~§;€ “c or;trac’:. 13:1 the
ins’£a11t ‘ uI:i’éi’t,:11€r 0:” tbs parties
preé:;§.:¢<i Of the wait nor
piacégfi 'U5 censtitute substantial iega}
€V§fl€II'¥3f: !§4'.)f terms of tha contract. The

on €33:-.: e _'_}'_'_~iE_;<:}.. 2 that the piaimiff was entitled ta

» ::23+f1;:;a"3;é 'is ggéiverse.

‘i_;5′,;:3 3 censequenca csf the finding recorfied on

£33353 “L1 and 2 as a 1:ac@3sa1*y cencommitment, {ha

V’ .:*$asf~G1*},s, findizigs-; arm} €fjOB{.’:}¥1Si0I1$ QV€§’ isgues 3 anti 4

¢:an::1o’9t;besus°§a%:1@d’ A

‘ii
cw”

.34.

1:3. The diepute firefight before court beleeljby the

plainfiff 3.2161 as replied by the defenéant__i;%f§L..’t}ie

statement leads :0 the enlyj ,..,(:encl:1$iefi:fjytiiaty .fe_::_ E1» _

éetermmafien of the lie, ends j2_ 1stice”w01efid.

{he defendants are fie the

measurement beaks. and — .¥:)i}.1fs, am} V the contracts,
as also permit add’i”£;iem»3′}.e__ evidence to be
adduced overiffhe xv{;3i91§}S’V’t<1A't:'i1e plaiztxtifi'.

appifQpIiz11feJ'§'..-vie._:e.11c::=s$f""-the I appeal and set asicie the
gzlcigizienfé: a11§1"'rie"<':*ifee: remit the proceeding :0 record

ad_jdi"ti0I3a1V bath era} and decumeritam and

V' 'V€iete:fs:ré.i:1e "«t§1e disputes by reeordiilg reasons, fméings

" . 53;.'-'1d eezie.I_ue.iens in accoreiarzee with law. The question of

1353? .ie–VAa1ie$vere& in the negative. It is made clear that the
' /51-».;,iX 'V/"

‘ ” mlew Lextend fair eppoflmfity 0:? hearing to the

Aiepeaftiee eemeemed to prefizjce adééiéenal evidence, and

fiiereafter pass 3. guégnent am} decree in aeeerfiance

wiih iaw. ‘K
L

.15.

The aypeai by the f21I1<:tim3ari<~':$ of the state has
arisen cut of the default comnlitted by each one cf the

appeflants in not producirig the record:;"~:§§.:=1»(i~~.VV net

aééucing Cara} avidence before the cozifi

afiowing me suit ta be deterimizisd 5:',

firmteriai evidence. Henca the 1{:0si:.'_'cf:this– $35.: is
"{6} be recovered from the.__Esa1aI*iés.__Gf .V;ézsz::§i~-:Vi')he""0f tfie
appeilants, pr0por'£j-orzately'

Parties am directed 'tr; ihe smart beiow on

3 :3'{§5§ ; ié; 'iés?§t1": costs.


Sd/-'
EUDGE

A $§?k[ }:2'i:    '