SANJIV KHANNA, J.

( 1 ) BY order dated 2nd April, 2008, the following two questions of law were referred to a larger Bench:-

1. Whether on interpretation of Clauses 2. 29 and 30 of the agreement, the amount determined by the Superintending Engineer under Clause 2 can be recovered by DDA as arrears of land revenue without adjudication and a decree of a civil court? 2. Whether DDA can recover its claims due under Clause 2 of the agreement with the contractors under Section 40 A of the dda Act?.

( 2 ) THE said reference was made in view of observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in DDA v. Sudhir Brothers, 1905 (2) ALR 306 (DB), which were relied upon by a learned single Judge of this Court in his decision dated 2nd August, 2007, (Reported in 2007 (144) DLT 686) in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5073/2003, Harinder Anand versus DDA and Others and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1 1878/2006, Bharat. Construction company Private Limited v. DDA and others. Another single Judge of this Court in writ Petition (Civil) No. 3738/2002, V. K. Mittal v. Assistant Collector; Grade-1, DDA and others, 2003 (104) DLT, (Delhi) 349 : 2003 AIHC 3512) had taken a contradictory view. ,.

( 3 ) DELHI