2012 (9) TMI 1060

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s arose between the parties under the contract agreement dated 04.11.2004 relating to the work of Allahabad Byepass Project-Construction of Road from 198.00 Km. to 242.708 Km. 2. The learned Single Judge has noted that the challenge to the award was primarily made in respect of Claims No. 1 & 3, i.e., the claim for payment of additional cost caused by subsequent notification increasing sales-tax on fuels from 2.5% to 5% and the claim for payment of additional cost caused by subsequent notification increasing royalty on soil, sand and boulders, which were allowed by the Arbitral Tribunal, apart from the grant of interest. The learned Single Judge has observed that these issues are covered by Division Bench judgments of this Court in Natio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....us assailing the rejection of the said objection by the learned Single Judge. 5. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant to explain the delay in filing the appeal is that against the impugned order the appellant has bona fide preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court since the relevant issues are pending before the Supreme Court in the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions, and even earlier the Supreme Court had entertained Special Leave Petitions directly against the decisions of the learned Single Judge of this Court in view of the identity of the issues. It is submitted that the Special Leave Petition had been preferred within the period of limitation. It is submitted that the said Special Leave Petition was,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en subsequently been followed in Larsen & Toubro Limited Vs. NHAI, FAO(OS) No. 345/2010 decided on 03.06.2011. In OSE-GIL J.V. (supra), a similar argument was raised before the Division Bench and rejected by it. The Division Bench observed as follows: "At that stage, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the Appellant had drawn our attention to the fact that notice had been issued in Special Leave to Petition against the Division Bench Judgment in ITD Cementation India Ltd. Nevertheless, on 29.11.2010 we passed the following Order in FAO(OS) 140/2008:- "We have noted that the questions which have arisen in this Appeal had also arisen before a Division Bench in National Highway Authority of India vs- ITD Cementation India L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d before us that the decision of the Division Bench in ITD Cementation Limited (supra) needs re-consideration by a larger bench of this Court and we find no reason to adopt that course of action. The decision in ITD Cementation Limited (supra) and OSE-GIL J.V. (supra) being judgments of coordinate benches, we are bound by the same. So far as the decision in West Coast Paper Mills Limited (supra) is concerned, the reliance placed on the said decision appears to be wholly misplaced. That was a case dealing with the aspect of applicability of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. In that context, the Supreme Court observed that once an appeal is filed before it and the same is entertained, the judgment of the High Court or the Tribunal is in jeopa....