Kerala High Court
M/S.N-Tech Tools & Traders vs Cochin Shipyard Limited
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/8TH PHALGUNA 1934
WP(C).No. 26349 of 2012 (P)
---------------------------
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER:
-------------------------------------------------------------
M/S.N-TECH TOOLS & TRADERS
KUZHIVELIPPADY, EDATHALA ALUVA 683561
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, IBRAHEEM MUHAMMED
BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH
SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU
SRI.JAGAN GEORGE
SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD
SRI.P.G.PRAMOD
SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL
SRI.EBRAHIM
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. COCHIN SHIPYARD LIMITED
P.O, BOX NO 1653, PERUMANOOR P.O
KOCHI 682015, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (MATERIALS), COCHIN SHIPYARD LIMITED,
PERUMANOOR P.O,
KOCHI 682015
3. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (MATERIALS),
COCHIN SHIPYARD LIMITED, PERUMANOOR P.O, KOCHI 682015
R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND (SR.)
R3 BY ADV. SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN
BY SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN (SR.)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MNS
WP(C).No. 26349 of 2012 (P)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER DOCUMENT ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT ON BEHALF OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT, FOR THE SALE OF SHIP BUILDING
SCRAP
EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE ORDER NO S/STEEL/1451/2012 DATED 31-03-
2012, PLACING THE ORDER FOR DISPOSAL OF 1,500 T OF SHIP BUILDING SCRAP ON
THE PETITIONER
EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PERFORMANCE BANK GUARANTEE DATED 24-04-
2012 OF THE DEDERAL BANK LIMITED, PERUMBAVOOR BRANCH ADDRESSED TO THE
1ST RESPONDENT, ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18-05-2012 RECEIVED BY THE
PETITIONER FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27-06-2012 OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT, RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER
EXT. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11-07-2012 TO EXHIBIT P5,
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXT. P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21-09-2012 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
EXT. P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08-10-2012 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
EXT. P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16-10-2012 OF THE ST
RRESPONDENT
EXT. P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 29-09-2012 GIVEN BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS
EXT. P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15-10-2012 GIVEN BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS
EXT. P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01-11-2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT, WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 05-11-2012
EXT. P13 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER DOCUMENT FOR SALE OF MS SHIP
BUILDING SCRAP PUBLISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON BEHALF OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 26349 of 2012
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of February, 2013
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was awarded a work so as to lift the scrap from the 1st respondent pursuant to Ext.P1 tender. The contractual period is from 01.04.2012 to 31.03.2013. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent terminated the contract in a quite arbitrary manner and has proceeded with re-tender, absolutely without any rhyme or reason, which in turn is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit referring to the sequence of events. It is stated that, in spite of the commitment as per the terms of the agreement and also the tender conditions, the work was not performed by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the parties concerned. Many letters/communications were issued to the petitioner in this regard. The lapse/delay on the part of the petitioner was causing irreparable loss and hardship to the 1st respondent, who is actually engaged in the fabrication of Indigenous Aircraft Craft W.P.C. No. 26349 of 2012 -2- Carrier (IAC) for Indian Navy and 20 numbers of Fast Patrolling Vessels for Indian Coast Guard, which is going on the premises and that any delay in completing the said work is liable to be answered by the 1st respondent. With reference to the point of safety and security as well, the scrap has to be removed. The first respondent contends that, as borne by the materials on record, the petitioner has lifted only 294.86 MT as on date and going by the average of the work as scheduled, the petitioner ought to have lifted approximately 875 MT in a period of 7 months. It is stated that, scrap of about 600 MT of the ship building scrap has been accumulated. Several opportunities have been given to the petitioner which were not made use of by the petitioner, who was virtually evading the work, offering some lame excuse. It was in the said circumstance that the contract was put an end to and the work was re-tendered. The averments stated in the counter affidavit have been sought to be rebutted by filing a reply affidavit as well.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the turn of events, awarding the contract to somebody else, pursuant to the re-tender, the petitioner would like to W.P.C. No. 26349 of 2012 -3- confine the relief sought for only to the extent of returning the EMD and also in respect of the the proceedings proposed by the 1st respondent to black list the petitioner. It is seen that, the petitioner has been served with Ext.P12 notice dated 1.11.2012 asking for explanation. It is for the petitioner to respond to the same, by filing necessary explanation in this regard. Since the time stipulated therein is already over and since the matter was pending before this Court right from 7.11.2012, this Court finds it fit and proper to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to file an explanation to Ext.P12. It is open for the petitioner to have the same submitted within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, upon which, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the competent authority in accordance with law, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one month' thereafter.
Writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Kp/-