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

1989 Supreme(AP) 344

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, V.NEELADRI RAO
Government Of A. P. – Appellant
Versus
P. V. Subbaiah – Respondent


JEEVAN REEDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and Civil Revision Petition are preferred by the Government of Andhra Pradesh against the judgment and order of the learned IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O. P. No. 280/1983 and O. S. No. 1543/1982. Under the said order, the learned Addl. Judge has rejected the petition filed by the Government to set aside the award made by a panel of arbitrators, and made the award a rule of the Court.

( 2 ) AN agreement was entered into between the Government and the respondent con tractor on 5-10-1978 pertaining ro earth work excavation and forming embankment of G. S. Main Canal beyond Lower Manair Dam from KM 148 to KM 149. It was a lumpsum contract. The approximate value of work to be done under the contract was estimated at Rs. 27,50,891. 05 Ps. Time for completing the work was 12 months from the date of delivery of the site. Site was delivered on 21-10-1978. A major portion of the work was completed before the expiry of twelve months, but not the entire work. The work was no doubt completed later. After completion of the work the contractor raised certain claims, which were not accepted by the Government. . Thereup




















































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