Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

c) It is further stated that there was no justification for stoppage of work and the action was arbitrary and totally unjust.

d) That the detail of this claim has been outlined and appended separately and the same shall from part of the statement of facts.

Claim No. 11: Rs.2,00,000/- payable as damages on account of hire charges of tools & plants and scaffolding.

a) That due to prolongation of the contract on account of the respondents the claimants had to maintain tools & plants, scaffolding etc, during the prolongation of the contract resulting in expenditure for the same.

b) That the said articles remained at site beyond the stipulated period and the claimants suffered loss due to the said prolongation.

Claim No. 15: Claimants claim damages Rs.6,25,979/- on account of establishment due to prolongation of the contract.

a) That the claimants had contemplated maintenance of establishment during stipulated period of completion but the work was prolonged due to various delays and defaults on the part of the respondents.

b) It is further stated that the claimants had to pay the establishment payment during prolongation and the said expenditure was unproductive and un contemplated.

(iii) it was also explicitly understood that the agreed liquidated damages were genuine pre-estimate of damages;
(iv) on the request of the respondent to extend the time-limit for supply of goods, ONGC informed specifically that time was extended but stipulated liquidated damages as agreed would be recovered;
(v) liquidated damages for delay in supply of goods were to be recovered by paying authorities from the bills for payment of cost of material supplied by the contractor;
(vi) there is nothing on record to suggest that stipulation for recovering liquidated damages was by way of penalty or that the said sum was in any way unreasonable.
(vii) In certain contracts, it is impossible to assess the damages or prove the same. Such situation is taken care of by Sections 73 and 74 of the Contract Act and in the present case by specific terms of the contract."

The judgment in ONGC v. Saw Pipes has been consistently followed till date.