S.C.PANDEY
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
RAJU CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, BHOPAL – Respondent
S.C. Pandey, J.
This revision u/s 115 of the CPC is directed against the order dated 7-2-1996 passed by the Fifth Additional District Judge, Bhopal in M.J.C. No. 27/95. The disposal of this revision shall govern the disposal of Civil Revision No. 857/96 as similar questions of facts and law arise in that revision too.
The non-applicant, a partnership firm, carries on the business of construction. It entered into an agreement dated 5-8-1991 with the applicant No. 1 whereby it was awarded the contract of constructing 112 A', 8 B' and 12 C' type of quarters at Hoshangabad within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of the work order with an additional period of 10 days as grace period, for the amount of Rs. 27,74,467/- after completion of the task under the contract the non-applicant was paid Rs. 22,00,178/- towards the final bill on 25-6-1994 which was received by it under protest.
Thereafter, the non-applicant raised a dispute regarding the item wise payment and claimed that it has been paid short to the time of Rs. 5,33,619/-. The agreement dated 5-8-1991 had an arbitration clause numbered as 25. It provided, inter alia, that in case of difference or dispute betwee
Nandyal Coop. Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. K.V. Mohan Rao
M/s. Harbans Singh Tuli and Sons Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Dhanrajamal Gobindram Vs. Shamji Kalidas and Co.
V.K. Construction Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Food Corporation of India, Chandigarh and Another
Food Corporation of India Vs. Ghanashyamdas Agarwal
Union of India Vs. M/s. Ajit Mehta and Associates, Pune and Others
The Food Corporation of India and Others Vs. Salam Traders and Another
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.