Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/2049/2007 of SSJV PROJECTS PVT LTD Vs HPSEB on 27 December 2007
of 2007. 27.12.2007. Present: Mr.Rajneesh Maniktala, counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Shrawan Dogra, counsel for the respondents. The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has prayed for the grant of following, amongst other, reliefs: “(i) That the respondents may be directed to extend
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
CWP No. 2049 of 2007.
27.12.2007. Present: Mr.Rajneesh Maniktala, counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Shrawan Dogra, counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has prayed for the grant of following, amongst other, reliefs:
“(i) That the respondents may be directed to extend the date upto 31.3.2008 for satisfying the arbitral award by depositing the amount of Rs.4,56,42,579 and the petitioner shall extend the Bank Guarantee upto 30.6.2008. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to prepare the final bills and finalize the same within time bound period.”
As far the first relief is concerned, Mr.Maniktala, learned counsel for the petitioner, has candidly admitted before us that the Bank Guarantee already stands invoked by the H.P. State Electricity Board. So the writ petition does not survive in respect of this relief.
As far as the second relief is concerned, the prayer is that final bills be prepared. This is a matter totally within the realm of contract. As and when the petitioner does his work, he is entitled under the terms of contract to raise bills, which shall be finalized by the respondent-Board. If the petitioner has any grievance in respect of final bills, he can take appropriate action in terms of the contract.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
CMPs No.3219, 3220 and 3221 of 2007:
Infructuous.
(Deepak Gupta), J.
December 27, 2007. [(TILAK)]
(V.K. Ahuja), J.