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

ORISSA HIGH COURT
NILACHAKRA CONSTN – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates:
['M/S H M DHAL', 'P K SAMANTRAY', 'M/S KAMAL BEHARI PANDA', '', 'S K MISHRA', 'P K SAHOO', 'S R RAY', 'Y DAS', 'M/S SANTANU KU SARANGI', 'AGA']

Page 1 of 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

ARBA No.05 of 2014

(Through Hybrid mode)

Nilachakra Constructions

….

Appellant

Mr. Santanu Kumar Sarangi, Senior Advocate

-versus-

State of Orissa and another

….

Respondents

Mr. Tarun Kumar Pattanaik, Advocate

(Additional Standing Counsel)

CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

Order No.

ORDER

11.08.2022

09.

1.

This appeal was moved on 14th July, 2022, when it was

contended on behalf of appellant that price variation claim

under contract clause 44.2 awarded, was erroneously set aside

in the challenge. On behalf of respondent, impugned judgment

dated 20th January, 2014 was defended on contention that in

award dated 3rd October, 2009 itself there was record of

upward

revision

of

estimated

contract

value

from

Rs.1,54,90,884/- to Rs.1,75,44,698/-.

2.

Mr. Sarangi, learned senior advocate appears on behalf

of appellant and had earlier pointed out, upward revision of

value of contract was on account of deviation.

3.

Mr. Pattnaik, learned advocate, Additional Standing

Counsel submits, appellant had given clear undertaking of ‘no

cl

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