Evidence

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Contractor Claims in Construction Dispute: National Building Construction vs. State of Maharashtra (2017)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Appeals, Breach of contract, Civil Procedure, Contract Law, Dipak Misra, Evidence, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 38, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Payment Disputes

Can a contractor claim additional payments for work when there’s a discrepancy in government-prescribed rates? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a civil appeal concerning a construction contract. The court upheld the High Court’s decision, which had rejected certain claims made by a contractor for extra work. This case clarifies how […]

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Contractor Claims in Construction Dispute: National Building Construction vs. State of Maharashtra (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Claims for Extra Work in Construction Contract: National Building Construction vs. State of Maharashtra (23 August 2017)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Appeals, Breach of contract, Civil Procedure, Contract Interpretation, Contract Law, Dipak Misra, Evidence, Judges, Pleadings, Terms and Conditions

Can a contractor claim additional payments for work beyond the original contract? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a case involving a construction contract dispute. The court examined whether a contractor was entitled to extra payments for stone pitching and water lead, ultimately ruling against the contractor. This judgment highlights the

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Claims for Extra Work in Construction Contract: National Building Construction vs. State of Maharashtra (23 August 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence: Baliraj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2017)

/ Criminal Law, Evidence, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, N.V. Ramana, Prafulla C. Pant, Witness Testimony

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused was guilty of murder based on the available evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Baliraj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. Judgment Date: April 25, 2017. Introduction Citation: (2017) INSC 377. Judges: N.V. Ramana, J. and Prafulla C. Pant, J. The Supreme Court of India recently addressed a criminal appeal

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence: Baliraj Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top