THILAKAM D/O LATE P K VASUDEVAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA; SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER; EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N H DIVISION; FEDERAL BANK LTD, FEDERAL TOWERS; C V JAYADAS S/O VELAYUDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The fifth respondent contractor had executed a work awarded by respondents 1 to 3. He had availed a loan from the fourth respondent bank for carrying out the said work. When the loan was not repaid, the fourth respondent bank filed O.A. No. 376 of 2002 in the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Kerala and Lakshadweep, Ernakulam. The petitioner, who was one among the sureties for the loan transaction was also a defendant in O.A. No. 376 of 2002. O.A. No. 376 of 2002 is still pending.

(2.) The fifth respondent did not complete the work in time. The contract with him was terminated and work was re-tendered at his risk and cost. The re-tender was at a lesser expense and therefore the fifth respondent was not proceeded against. However, the bill amount is remaining unpaid for want of a no objection certificate. In this writ petition, the petitioner states that the fifth respondent has executed a power of attorney in favour of the fourth respondent bank authorising the bank to collect the amounts due to the fifth respondent from respondents 1 to 3. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the non-payment of the amount due to the fifth respondent for the work executed by him, to the fourth respondent.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second respondent. Para 3 of the statement reads as follows: