SPML INFRA LTD. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After arguing on various aspects and questions involved in the present writ petition, Mr. Balia, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Clause 3(c) of the condition of the contract dtd. 18/9/2012 is unconscionable and liable to be struck off in light of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of LIC of India and Anr. v. Consumer Education and Research Centre and Ors. reported in (1995) 5 SCC 482 and Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in (2016) 11 SCC 720. He argues that in light of these judgments and other judgments, the respondents have no power to recover the amount arising under one contract from petitioner's other contracts.

(2.) Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General vehemently opposes this argument and all other arguments, while asserting that the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court and the proper remedy for the petitioner is to approach competent Civil Court.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the order dtd. 19/7/2017 passed by the Division Bench in M/s Essar Projects Ltd v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. in DB Special Appeal (Writ) No. 143/2006, which has been duly followed by this Court in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 8684/2019 (SPML Infra Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.), this Court is inclined to pass order in similar terms, till the case is decided.