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

1998 Supreme(Bom) 805

D.D.SINHA
Executive Engineer, Upper Painganga Project – Appellant
Versus
M. V. Panse and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - D.D. SINHA, J.:---Heard Smt. Wandile, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the applicant, and Shri Pendse, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2. The Civil revision application is directed against the judgment and order dated 19-10-1996 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pusad in M.J.C. No. 21 of 1995 whereby the learned Court below rejected the application moved by the present applicant under section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

2.It will be proper for me to consider few relevant facts, which have given rise to the dispute in question. At the relevant time, the applicant was Executive Engineer, Upper Painganga Project,Division No. 2, Umarkhed. He was incharge of construction of left bank canal of Painganga Project at Isapur. The tenders were invited by the Superintending Engineer, Upper Painganga Project Circle, Nanded for the above referred construction work. The tender of respondent No. 2 M/s. Qureshi brothers being lowest, was accepted and construction work of box culvert at R.D. 33. 498 metres at Isapur left bank canal was entrusted to it. The work order was accordingly issued to the respondent No. 2 on 8-6-1984 as per agreement No. L.C.B 1 of 198








































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