IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2009 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WA.No. 2878 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19773/2009 Dated 02/12/2009 .................... APPELLANT/5th RESPONDENT: -------------------------------- C.V. JAYADAS, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, CHEMPADIYIL HOUSE, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 020. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THILAKOM, D/O. LATE P.K. VASUDEVAN, PULLARKAT PURAYUR P.O., DESOM, ALUVA. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, N.H. SOUTH CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H. DIVISION, KODUNGALLUR. 5. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., FEDERAL TOWERS, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S. ESAWARAN. R5 BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE VARGHESE. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 2878 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. The 5th respondent appellant had executed the work awarded to him by respondent Nos.1 and 3 and in this regard he had availed certain loan from the 4th respondent Bank for carrying out the work. When the loan was not repaid, the Bank filed OA No.736 of 2002 before the DRT Kerala and Lakshadeep at Ernakulam. In that proceeding the writ petitioner, divorced wife of the appellant, was impleaded as defendant as she is the surety. It is the undisputed fact that the said OA is pending consideration. 2. In the meanwhile, as the appellant did not complete the work, the contract was terminated and the work re-tendered at his risk and cost. Since the work was re-tendered at a lower cost, the 5th respondent/appellant was not proceeded with. However, the appellant remained unpaid for want of no objection certificate. As such, the WA No.2878 of 2009 -:2:- guarantor/surety viz, the writ petitioner, approached this Court with a prayer that pending consideration of the OA, respondents 1 to 3 to take final decision in the matter on the amount due to the appellant herein and deposit the same with the 4th respondent Bank in the account of the appellant in order to enable the 4th respondent Bank to settle the dispute. 3. The learned Single Judge on consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of the case disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to disburse the balance amount payable to the appellant to the Bank and the Bank was directed to appropriate the amount towards the dues payable by the appellant herein. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has approached this Court in the present appeal. 4. The primary contention of the appellant is that as there is huge dues to the appellant from respondent Nos.1 to 3, he is being forced to approach the Civil Court seeking damages and compensation and if the amount is now kept with the Bank, he will be helpless and left with no remains. In view of the fact that OA No.736 of 2002 is pending before the DRT and in order to WA No.2878 of 2009 -:3:- salvage the situation by saving the surety from her liability, in our view, the learned Single Judge was justified in issuing the directions which cannot be said to be either illegal or perverse. As such we find no merit in the contentions of the appellant and the appeal is dismissed. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. A.K. Basheer, Judge. ttb