RANGASAMY
Superintending Engineer T. N. U. D. P. , Madras Circle and Another – Appellant
Versus
A. V. Rangaraju and Another – Respondent
RANGASAMY, J.
These petitions O.Ps. 40, 47 and 62/94 have been filed under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the awards. The averments in all these petitions are common except the number of agreement and the value of the work
2. The petitioners Tamil Nadu Housing Board entrusted the constructions work with the second respondent contractor and for the agreement bearing No. WBR/51-90-91 dated 19-3-1991, the value of the contract given to the second respondent was Rs. 55, 41, 702/- and the work had to be completed within 12 months from the date of handing over the site. O.P. No. 40/94 relates to this work
3. O.P. No. 47 of 1994 relates to the contract work under the agreement No. WBCR/60/90-91 dated 23.2.1991 and the value of the work covered under this agreement was Rs. 10.74 lakhs. The period of contract was 4 months from the date of handing over the site
4. O.P. No. 62 of 1994 relates to the agreement No. 11/89-90 dated 28-6-1989 and the value of the covered under the contract was Rs. 40, 37, 881.85 and the period of contract was 10 months from the date of handing over the site
5. As the work were not completed within the contractual period, the contracts were t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.