counter claim.
39. Learned counsel for the petitioner made a similar
submission also in respect of the claim for overheads awarded by the
arbitral tribunal ... claim no.2 came
to be rejected as not pressed by the respondent. The arbitral tribunal
allowed claim for overheads
remaining claims was, however, set aside.
4. The Appellant had claimed an amount of Rs.1,88,15,960/- towards
overhead losses on the basis ... allowed the claim on
the basis of a finding that Hudson's Formula is adopted for quantification of
claims for overhead losses in India
with regard to claim no. A1 concerning 'Overhead
losses for underutilised and unutilised overheads', Claim No. A3
concerning 'Loss of profit ... Claims
XXI. Claimant claimed in 2 parts:
i. Claim Part-1 deals with claims against work done but not paid.
ii. Claim Part-2 deals
relating to the claim/modified claim and awarded
amount is as under:
Claim Briefs of claims In Org. Claim In Mod. Claim Awarded ... Claims
XIX. Claimant claimed in 2 parts:
i. Claim Part-1 deals with claims against work done but not paid.
ii. Claim Part-2 deals
Statement of Claims on
04.02.2011. The claims made by IJM in the Statement of Claims are
tabulated below: -
Claim Claim for refund of Extra ... documents, award as summarized
below: -
Claim Description of Claim Amount claimed Amount
no. in Rs awarded in Rs
1 Claim
Arbitrator had held that the claim was not barred by
limitation because Appellant's claim for overhead charges was denied
by Respondent only ... instead rejected the entire claim saying it
was barred by limitation;
(e) Since Appellant had claimed the overhead expenses till 11 th
January
Arbitrator had held that the claim was not barred by
limitation because Appellant's claim for overhead charges was denied
by Respondent only ... instead rejected the entire claim saying it
was barred by limitation;
(e) Since Appellant had claimed the overhead expenses till 11 th
January
Claim 1.1 Rs.9,450/-
Illegal recoveries
Claim 1.2 Rs.29,570/-
For not conducting
quality tests
Claim 1.3 Rejected
Hacking of stone
Claim ... prices
Claim 1.5 Rejected
Kota stone
Claim 1.6 Rejected
Extra work of mortar
Claim no.1.7
Mortar Work Rejected
2. Claim
overheads (Claim No.2) and loss of profits (Claim
no.3) on account of delay in completion of the works. The petitioner
had claimed that ... Tribunal in respect of Claim no.1(a), the
petitioner was also entitled for claim of damages/compensation for
overheads during the extended period
consideration of this
court is whether the respondent who had made claim for
overhead on the basis that the respondent had
considered 10% towards overhead ... manifestly
misconceived notion that a contractor is entitled to
claim overhead losses even in the absence of evidence
on the basis of Hudson
