Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"14. After having heard the rival contentions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record of the case very carefully, this court is of the considered opinion that facts which are not disputed are that HSMITC, assigned lining work of water course to the plaintiff. It is also not disputed that plaintiff had completed lining work of 1327 feet. That fact is also evident vide Ex. P6.
3 of 5 It is also not disputed that plaintiff has also completed additional work of lining of water course to the extent of 447 feet. But the appellant/defendant has disputed that lining work to the extent of 447 feet was without any sanction from the competent authority. PW3 who is official of the Irrigation Department has proved documents Ex. P6 to Ex. P25 and he has also proved that measurement book no. 4162 was prepared regarding the execution of additional work by the plaintiff. Admittedly, the completion of additional work same is being enjoyed by HSMITC. Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of J&K Versus Dev Dut Pandit 1999 (4) R.C R (Civil) 169 has held as under:-