Whether the court can deny payment to the contractor for additional work if he has not intimated to the employer in the mode provided in the contract?

  In any event, a contractual clause such as condition no. 9 in the present case, which stipulates the time and manner within which the contractor has to intimate the employer about extra or additional work, has never been considered as a statutory limitation or bar for a claim for extra/additional work. The purpose of such stipulation is to ensure that extra/additional work has actually been done; once it is established that the work has indeed been done, payment for it cannot be denied on a technical ground such as non-intimation according to the stipulation. (See, Chandigarh Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Punjab1.) On the basis of this law and the evidence produced before the court, and which is noted above, the Plaintiff has clearly made out its case for payment of both extra works amounting to Rs. 9,31,535. {Para 9}

In the High Court of Bombay

(Before S.C. Gupte, J.)

Ajay Deep Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs Maharashtra State Police Housing & Welfare Corporation Ltd. 

Suit No. 1418 of 2003

Decided on June 28, 2021

Citation: 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 952

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

S.C. Gupte, J.:

Read full Judgment here: Click here

Print Page