Back
TRIPURA HIGH COURT
, J
State of Tripura – Appellant
Versus
The contractor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the core facts surrounding the dispute over contract execution and claims for price adjustment due to non-inclusion of escalation clause. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. challenges to the arbitrator's decision and applicability of procedural fairness rule regarding price escalation not raised in prior stages. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. final decision to uphold the award and dismiss the appeal. (Para 13) |
1. This is an appeal under S.37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 from the judgment and order dated 04.02.2011 delivered in case No. Misc.(ARB)12/2008 by the District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala.
2. Facts are mostly admitted. The respondent, hereinafter 'the contractor' , was awarded the work, namely 'Replacement of bailey bridge at Ch 34.80 km. on Agartala - Simna road by R.C.C. Box Culvert (length 24.00 m.) 8.00 m. Triple Cell Job No.TP / CAU / 265/2000-01' under agreement No.T / EE / B&R / AGAR - II / SE - IV / 144/2001-2002, for an estimated cost of Rs.26,04,217 whereas the tender value was Rs.35,93,559 with 37.99% above.
3. After completion of the work, the contractor raised various disputes, including paying him the escalation pric
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
