M/s Sahabuddin Siddique and Anr vs The Union of India and 4 Ors Advocate - Marto Kato, ,DSGI,GA (AP) — WA/32/2025

Case under Gauhati High Court Rules Section 5. Disposed: --Dismissed on 07th May 2026.

CNR: GAHC040010872025

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WA/645/2025

Filing Date

01-07-2025

Registration No

WA/32/2025

Registration Date

01-07-2025

Judge

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

Coram

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

Bench Type

Division Bench

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

Gauhati High Court Rules Section 5

Petitioner(s)

M/s Sahabuddin Siddique and Anr

Adv. P J Saikia,Kemo Lollen,Kemo Lollen, ,Ravi Shankar Mishra,Kemo Lollen

Sahabuddin Siddique

Respondent(s)

The Union of India and 4 Ors Advocate - Marto Kato, ,DSGI,GA (AP)

The Border Road Organization

The Chief Engineer

The Commander

The Deputy Commissioner

Valecha Engineering Ltd

Canara Bank

Hearing History

Judge: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

03-03-2026

ADMISSION

22-01-2026

ADMISSION

19-01-2026

ADMISSION

04-12-2025

ADMISSION

17-11-2025

ORDERS

Orders

07-05-2026
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

Case Summary: WA/32/2025 Court Decision: The Gauhati High Court dismissed the appellants' appeal, upholding the Single Judge's order that relegated them to civil court for claims regarding liquidated damages and bank guarantee invocation. Key Reasoning: The court held that disputes over breach of contract and compensation under Sections 73-74 of the Indian Contract Act require determination by an adjudicatory forum (civil court or arbitration tribunal), not writ court. Since the appellants lacked direct privity with the EPC contract and disputed factual issues existed (completion percentage: appellants claimed 49%, respondents claimed 26.21%), these matters were inappropriate for writ jurisdiction. The court upheld the single judge's direction to issue work completion certificates based on joint verification and release pending bills accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WA/32/2025 Court Decision: The Gauhati High Court dismissed the appellants' appeal, upholding the Single Judge's order that relegated them to civil court for claims regarding liquidated damages and bank guarantee invocation. Key Reasoning: The court held that disputes over breach of contract and compensation under Sections 73-74 of the Indian Contract Act require determination by an adjudicatory forum (civil court or arbitration tribunal), not writ court. Since the appellants lacked direct privity with the EPC contract and disputed factual issues existed (completion percentage: appellants claimed 49%, respondents claimed 26.21%), these matters were inappropriate for writ jurisdiction. The court upheld the single judge's direction to issue work completion certificates based on joint verification and release pending bills accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case