High Court Kerala High Court

K.K.Joy vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 3 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.K.Joy vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 3 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 33296 of 2010(J)


1. K.K.JOY, S/O.K.J.KURIAKOSE,AGED 56,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIVISIONAL ENGINEER(SURVEY & ACCESS NETW

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.J.JOSEPH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :03/11/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
              --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) NO.33296 OF 2010(J)
              --------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

Respondents awarded a contract to the petitioner for

executing the works of trenching, pipe laying, cable blowing and

associated works in Section ANW 3/08 of Chittoor OAN route. By

Ext.P4, the contract was terminated at the risk and cost of the

petitioner. According to the petitioner he submitted Ext.P5

current bill for the works executed, the payment of which has

been declined by Ext.P6. It is challenging Ext.P6 and seeking a

direction to the respondents to release payments for the works

executed by the petitioner the writ petition is filed.

2. A reading of Ext.P6 shows that payment has been

declined to the petitioner for the reason that the contract was

terminated at the risk and costs of the petitioner. According to the

respondents, the question of payment can be considered only

after completing the work by other means at the risk and costs of

the petitioner.

3. Evidently therefore the liability of the respondents to

make payment to the petitioner, at least for the present is

WPC.No. 33296/2010
:2 :

disputed by them. It is also the admitted position that the

agreement itself provides for arbitration of the dispute. Therefore

if at all the petitioner has any claim, such claim can be raised by

the petitioner only in terms of the agreement which provides for

arbitration.

With that liberty the Writ Petition is dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/