<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1951 (5) TMI 19 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287683</link>
    <description>Dispute concerns multiple payment claims under construction contracts decided on arbitration awards. On the issue of land acquisition for stacking bricks the arbitrator&#039;s valuation was treated as a contractual finding and the award upheld. Recovery for additional wages paid to imported labour was set aside because the arbitrator imposed a moral/implied obligation beyond contractual liability, making the award illegal on its face. Compensation for kuchcha bricks destroyed by rain was sustained where the award was supported by findings. Damages for business loss due to non-removal of bricks were upheld despite limited reasoning. Claims for post-bill interest were set aside for lack of arbitratorial jurisdiction. Decrees modified accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:52:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=611378" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (5) TMI 19 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287683</link>
      <description>Dispute concerns multiple payment claims under construction contracts decided on arbitration awards. On the issue of land acquisition for stacking bricks the arbitrator&#039;s valuation was treated as a contractual finding and the award upheld. Recovery for additional wages paid to imported labour was set aside because the arbitrator imposed a moral/implied obligation beyond contractual liability, making the award illegal on its face. Compensation for kuchcha bricks destroyed by rain was sustained where the award was supported by findings. Damages for business loss due to non-removal of bricks were upheld despite limited reasoning. Claims for post-bill interest were set aside for lack of arbitratorial jurisdiction. Decrees modified accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>