SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(AP) 642

G.BIKSHAPATHY, B.SUBHASHAN REDDY
T. A. Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) ALL the CMAs, and CRP can be disposed of by a common judgment as they arise out of an award passed by the learned Arbitrator dated 30-9-1991.

( 2 ) THE facts culminating in the present cases are traced out as follows: for the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as the department and the Contractor respectively.

( 3 ) THE Contractor entered into an agreement with the department for the works forming approaches to the Randb in M. I8/4 of Guntur-Repalle Road (K. M. 06 of nidubrole-Govada Road) in Ponnur municipal limits including the formation of the service roads on either side of the overbridge of Nidubrole in lieu of level crossing No. 267 of Vijayawada-Gudur section in Guntur District.

( 4 ) AGREEMENT was entered on 27-11-1978 between the parties and the time for completion of the work was fixed at 15 months from the date of handing over the site. According to the department, the site was handed over on 27-11-1978, but the work was completed only by the end of January, 1985. After the work was over, the Contractor laid a claim on 16-6-1992 to the Superintending Engineer and thereafter he filed OP No. 21 of 1988 for appointment of A






































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top