JUDGMENT :

V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.

1. The plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money has come up with the above appeal challenging the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in a regular appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by which the decree granted by the Trial Court for recovery of Rs. 24,97,077/- together with interest at 10% per annum was modified into a decree for recovery of Rs. 7,19,412/- together with interest.

2. We have heard Mr. Vinay Navare, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sunil Murarka, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The appellant is a registered contractor with the Government of Maharashtra. In a tender for the execution of the work of Regional Rural Piped Water Supply Scheme for Dabhol-Bhopan and other villages in Ratnagiri District, the appellant became the successful tenderer. He was issued with a work order on 03.07.1986, for the execution of the work at the cost of Rs. 80,45,034/- which was 47% above the estimated cost. The time for the completion of the work was stipulated as 30 months. Bu