M/S PRASAD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS.
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. THANGKHIEW
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2024-05-01. M/S PRASAD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Serial No. 06 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C). No. 167 of 2023 Date of Decision :01. 05. 2024 M/s. Prasad Construction Company H/o Tarajan Path, Jorhat – 785001, Assam. …Petitioner -Versus- 1. Union of India Represented through Chief Engineer, Spread Eagle Falls, Shillong-793011. 2. Chief Engineer Shillong Zone, Spread Eagle Falls, Shillong-793011. 3. Garrison Engineer, Shillong Division, Shillong – 793002. 4. Controller of Defence Account (CDA), Udayan Bhavan, Narangi, Guwahati- 781171, Assam. 5. Senior Account Officer, Office of the Controller of Defence Account, Udayan Bhavan, Narangi, Guwahati- 781171, Assam. …Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge. Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Ms. P. D. B. Barauh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. B. A. Wanswett, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI with Ms. K. Gurung, Adv.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is before this Court for re-verification of the Minus Final Bill where it has been shown that there is deduction of VAT and Labour Cess. 2. It has been submitted that the price quoted by the petitioner was already inclusive of VAT and other taxes, but in the Final Bill, the VAT percentage was wrongly added in the price quoted, and instead, it has been shown that the Final Bill based on minus side required the petitioner to deposit a sum of ₹ 56,05,861/- in favour of the respondent Garrison Engineer. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up, Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. K.
Gurung, learned counsel for the respondents, on instruction had produced a communication from the Garrison Engineer th dated 30 March, 2024, which shows that in fact the Minus Final Bill amount is only ₹ 3,31,916/-, which is payable by the petitioner. 4. In view of this development, the parties pray that the instant writ petition be closed. 5. Considering the submissions and having examined the letter dated th 30 March, 2024, it appears that nothing remains for consideration in the instant writ petition as the writ petitioner is also agreeable to pay the Minus Final Bill of ₹3,31,916/-, subject to other claims that they may have with regard to the contract. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of and the impugned letter th dated 16 November, 2022, where the said demand has been made is set aside and quashed. Matter stands closed and disposed of. th 7. Copy of the letter dated 30 March, 2024 is taken on board and made part of the record. Judge Meghalaya 01. 05.
2024 “Samantha PS”
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.