Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.33 seconds)

P.M. Paul vs Union Of India on 16 January, 1989

(d) For variations exceeding these limits, separate rates will be negotiated. It shall be specifically noted that TNEB shall not pay any increase in rates over those accepted herein for the delay in completion of works under any circumstances.” Thus, except with regard to a variation of not less than 25% in the total contract value, parties agreed that the prices would remain firm until completion of work, including during extended periods. While escalation may be granted when the contract is silent (P.M. Paul v. Union of India 1989 Supp (1) SCC
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 31 - S Mukharji - Full Document

The Assam State Electricity Board ... vs Buildworth Pvt. Ltd. Represented By Its ... on 4 July, 2017

368), it cannot be granted when there is an unequivocal prohibition even in the extended period. Because of the nature of the clause, therefore, even the judgment of the Supreme Court in Assam State Electricity Board and others v. Buildworth (P) Ltd. (2017) 8 SCC 146 does not come to the aid of the plaintiff. By taking note of these contractual clauses, the escalation claim is rejected.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 20 - Cited by 43 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document
1