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

1984 Supreme(AP) 230

P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU, PUNNAIAH
Government Of A. P. – Appellant
Versus
Bactchala Balaiah – Respondent


PUNNAYYA, J.

( 1 ) THE Revision and the C. M. A. arise out of the proceedings of Original Suit No. 124 of 1982. The brief facts leading to the revision and the C. M. A. are as follows: The plaintiff in the suit was a contractor. He entered into an agreement with defendants 1 and 2 who represent the State of Andhra Pradesh to do earth work over the embankment of Godavari South canal beyond lower Manair Dam. His tender was accepted and he completed the work as per the agreement. However, disputes arose between him and the defendants regarding the payment of the amounts for the work done by him. Both parties appointed defendants 3 to 5 as arbitrators to resolve the dispute. After due enquiry, defendants 3 to 5 passed an award on 15-8-1982 in favour of the contractor-plaintiff. Copies of the award were communicated to defendants 1 and 2. But the Government did not pay the amount as per the award and hence the contract filed the suit in the Subordinate Judges Court, Ongole, to make the award a rule of Court. Defendants 1 and 2 did not file any petition to set aside the award in the Court under S. 30, Arbitration Act. R. P. Notices were taken on the defendants 1 to 5 on 29-10-1982. Notic
































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