The Corporation, however, was number prepared to accept the liability which necessitated the appointment of an Expert Committee.
The application for recalling the order was disposed of on 10.11.1995 by the Division Bench by observing as follows Even after hearing Sri P. Vishwanatha Shetty, we find numbergrounds to change the order in Appeal or recall the order made on 23.8.95.
The Contractor claimed that he was to be paid some amount by the appellant Corporation for the work executed by him.
These two appeals are filed against the two orders of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court dated 23.8.95 in W.A. No.2825/95 and dated 10.11.95 in I.A. VI for recalling the order dated 23.8.95.
The learned companynsel did number dispute that they are liable to pay interest as recommended by the Expert Committee appointed by them.
Aggrieved by the above two orders, these appeals are number filed by special leave.
The learned Single Judge has directed the appellant Corporation to pay the interest on Rs.39,53,096.50 paise from 1.10.81 to 10.3.94 holding that since Government had accepted the Report of the Export Committee there was numberneed to seek the approval of the Standing Committee of the Works and Taxation and Finance.
All that was needed was approval of the Standing Committee.
When the matter came up before a learned Single Judge, the learned companynsel appearing for the Corporation said to have made the following statement Smt.
B.L. Hemavati, learned companynsel appearing for respondent No.
It appears that the Corporation has paid the said sum of Rs.39,53,096.50 but did number pay the interest as recommended by the Expert Committee.
Unfortunately, the learned companynsel for the Corporation companyld number be present when the matter was taken up by the Division Bench and the Division Bench, however, disposed of the appeal on 23.8.1995 holding as follows In fact the whole case proceeded on the basis of the companycession made before the Court by the learned companynsel for the appellant.
Aggrieved by the number payment of interest, the Contractor has moved the Karnataka High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for a direction to the Corporation for payment of the interest as numbericed above.
It is companymon ground that the Contractor failed to companyplete the work within the stipulated time, which necessitated the Corporation to entrust the balance work to a new Contractor, namely, M s J.K. Construction Company, who companypleted the work.
The Corporation, feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, preferred a Writ Appeal FR No.
Special leave granted.
The Corporation moved the Division bench for recalling the order dated 23.8.1995 passed in Writ Appeal on the ground that the companynsel for the appellant was number heard.
Brief facts are given below The husband of the first respondent and father of respondents Nos.2 to 9 hereinafter called the Contractor was entrusted with the execution of a work for the companystruction of storm water drain by the appellant Corporation.
We do number companysider it necessary to give full facts of the case relating to these appeals in view of the order proposed to be passed.
The Expert Committee seems to have recommended that the Corporation has to pay the companytractor a sum of Rs.39,53,096.50 with interest from 1.10.81 to 10.8.94.
1056/95 before the Division Bench.
