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

1989 Supreme(Del) 375

MAHINDER NARAIN
N. D. R. ISRANI – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASHOK JAIN, Naresh Markanda, P.C.MARKANDA

Mahinder Narain

( 1 ) BY this order I propose of objections of the Delhi Development Authority, to an award dated 17-7-1987.

( 2 ) TIME was taken by the Delhi Development Authority for filing affidavit evidence. No affidavit evidence has been filed. It is stated by counsel that she wishes to rely upon the record of the case before the Arbitrator, and the terms of the agreement between the parties.

( 3 ) THE objections in this petition relate to claims No. 1, 5, 9 and 10. Claim No. 1 which was raised by the contractor/petitioner, before the Arbitrator, related to making of grooves in cement plaster surface. It is contended on behalf of the respondent that these grooves have to be made before plastering. Making of grooves before plastering is impossible, as any plaster which is applied on the groove, will cover it, and it will eliminate the grooves. All the grooves on plastered surface have to be made when the plastered surface is wet. Distinct and separate activity, has to be carried out by use of implements in the shape of wooden or iron and steel battens to make the grooves. This claim has been found to be justified by the Arbitrator. 1 find no substance in the contention of the re






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