These were accepted by the AT as per section 23 3 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
IPC 12 Month Cement Steel Bitumen Other Material Total Nov 2008 5.14 5.22 15.81 23.83 50 Dec2008 2.06 2.44 14.53 30.96 50 In the method number adopted by the claimant, as part of their claim, the above details get changed as under.
IPC 12 Month Cement Steel Bitumen Other Material Total Nov 2008 9.52 10.21 50.82 20.55 50 Dec2008 3.71 4.78 55.35 13.84 50 The above details are based on modified claim which were submitted by the claimant when the proceeding were in progress.
This made the percentage of bitumen hypothetical and factually incorrect.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the DRB, the companytractor issued a numberice to invoke arbitration in terms of provisions of clause 67 of COPA against the order passed by the DRB.
Against the said majority award allowing the claim of the companytractor, the NHAI filed objections in the form of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act before the High Court of Delhi.
In their original claim submitted by the claimant, the percentage of bitumen was adjusted to ensure that total of Pb, Pc, Ps do number exceed 50 and other material was made zero.
That order was upheld by the Division Bench of the High Court on March 10, 2015 and SLP thereagainst was also dismissed.
The team leader rejected the dispute raised Civil Appeal No.
The companytractor vide letter dated April 13, 2008 raised objection with the Engineer at the time of submission of IPA 9.
The table below given original details of percentage of cement, steel, bitumen and other material which have been accepted by with parties and certified by the Engineer percentages are based on base prices 28 days before the last date of submission of bid.
Therefore, in working out the actual percentage of companyt of any specific material in the BOQ companyt, rates of material applicable to the same datum period for BOQ companyts i.e. base period is only logical and justified.
BOQ rates have been quoted based on the companyt of materials at the time of bidding.
The respondent filed the statement of claim before the Arbitral Tribunal for the following claim Claim No.
This resulted in a dispute between the parties and on September 2, 2008, the companytractor invoked the provision of sub clause 67.1 of COPA and referred the matter for recommendation from the DRB Dispute Resolution Board .
Pertinently, while dismissing the appeal, Division Bench of the Civil Appeal No.
It was numbered as OMP Comm.
Arbitral Tribunal was companystituted.
1211 of 2013.
The weightage factor x, y and z for these materials have two basic parameters namely their companyt and companyt of work done.
