Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(ii) As per the contract, the contractor submitted the basic engineering package (BEP), lay out and P&I diagram to EIL on 1st May, 1995 immediately after work awarded, these were to be finalised and approved by GAIL at the earliest, within twenty days. GAIL however failed to do so. The first reaction of EIL to these OMP No. 66/2004 & OMP No. 88/2004 page 122 of 145 drawings was given only on 9th June, 1995. Communications dated 20th and 30th June; 3rd and 30th August and 2nd, 9th and 18th September, 1995 from the contractor were of no avail. As a result, the contractor also held discussions on 22nd/23rd June and 10th July, 1995 with GAIL pressing for early approvals. It is stated that comments were only received piecemeal; the lay out revised thrice; despite consent having been given on 3rd August, 1995, lay out was revised even thereafter on 12th September, 1995. On 12th September, 1995 by a detailed letter, the respondent brought to the notice of EIL that after repeated discussions, comments of EIL had been fully addressed in the basic engineering and plant layout drawings and revised drawings of 3rd August, 1995 were treated as final. However, EIL had made further changes which would cause re-drafting of almost all drawings and the same would delay the engineering schedule as well as construction schedule as unless the layout plan was frozen, no site activity could be comenced. It has been pointed out that under the contract, the clearance which was envisaged within three weeks as per clause 62.3, came in the end of September, 1995 thus inducing a chain reaction in delays.