https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402078 The court held that there was no privity of contract between DMRC and the petitioners, leading to the dismissal of the writ petitions seeking payment for work done on the Kochi Metro Rail Project. It was determined that DMRC was not liable for payments to the petitioners, emphasizing that contractual disputes should be resolved through statutory and common law remedies rather than under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The judgment underscored that direct payments should be made by EIEL unless accepted by DMRC, ultimately denying the payment claim. en-us Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402078 The court held that there was no privity of contract between DMRC and the petitioners, leading to the dismissal of the writ petitions seeking payment for work done on the Kochi Metro Rail Project. It was determined that DMRC was not liable for payments to the petitioners, emphasizing that contractual disputes should be resolved through statutory and common law remedies rather than under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The judgment underscored that direct payments should be made by EIEL unless accepted by DMRC, ultimately denying the payment claim. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402078