← Library
Patna High CourtC.R./126/2013dismissed

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal, Patna And ORS. v. Agastya Engineers Private Limited, Patna

2016-03-16Mr. Justice V. Nath2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Revision No.126 of 2013 ====================================================== 1.The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Chief Engineer-3, Rural Works Department, Hajipur Head Quarter at Vishwashwariya Bhawan, Bihar, Patna.

3.The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work circle-2, Darbhanga.

4.The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division-2, Benipur (Beraul) Darbhanga.

5.The Assistant Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division-2, Benipur (Beraul) Darbhanga.

.... .... Respondents/Petitioner/s

Versus

Agastya Engineers Private Limited, through the Director, Harisah Singh son of Late Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of L-40, Road NO. 20, Srikrishna Nagar, Patna, P.S. Budha Colony, District Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT 16-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the opposite parties.

In view of the stand taken on behalf of the opposite party delay in filing this revision application is condoned. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 07.05.2012 passed in Reference Case No. 128 of 2010 by which the Bihar Public Works Contract Dispute Arbitration Tribunal passed an interim award for payment of Rs. 52,82,804/- to the opposite parties.

It is manifest from the impugned award that the

Patna High Court C.R. No.126 of 2013 (8) dt.16-03-2016 aforesaid amount was the admitted dues as agreed by the parties and in that view of the matter, the said award was passed. During the course of submissions, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners could not show or establish any error of jurisdiction, illegality or material illegality in the impugned order as the interim award proceeds on the basis of admitted dues as agreed by the parties. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

This revision application is, accordingly, dismissed. (V. Nath, J) Ranjan/- U