Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.37 seconds)

Abl International Ltd. & Anr vs Export Credit Guarantee Corportion Of ... on 18 December, 2003

“Due to aforesaid facts and description it is clear Date: 2019.03.13 17:24:52 IST Reason: that Rs.113.29 lacs has to be released by Government/Mela Administration against the Budget presented by U.P. Jal Nigam, Magh Mela 2008-09. 1 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2610 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 29505 of 2014) There is no money available under account of Magh Mela 2008-09 of U.P. Jal Nigam. And could not obtained the rest of amount from the Mela Administration/Government. Therefore, payment regarding M/s. Surya Construction, 323/3, Alopibagh, Allahabad will be paid after availability of the money from the Government.” It is clear, therefore, from the aforesaid order dated 22.03.2014 that there is no dispute as to the amount that has to be paid to the appellant. Despite this, when the appellant knocked at the doors of the High Court in a writ petition being Writ Civil No. 25216/2014, the impugned judgment dated 02.05.2014 dismissed the writ petition stating that disputed questions of fact arise and that the amount due arises out of a contract. We are afraid the High Court was wholly incorrect inasmuch as there was no disputed question of fact. On the contrary, the amount payable to the appellant is wholly undisputed. Equally, it is well settled that where the State behaves arbitrarily, even in the realm of contract, the High Court could interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India [‘ABL International Ltd. and Another v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. and Others’ (2004 (3) SCC 553)].
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 1154 - Full Document
1