R KANNAIYAN Vs. SECRETARY HIGHWAYS AND RURAL WORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL suit filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.1999 in O.S.No.137 of 1993 on the file of the III Additional Sub-Judge, Coimbatore. The appellant/plaintiff has preferred this appeal as against the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.137 of 1993 on the file of the learned III Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.

(2.) THE necessary facts of the appellant/plaintiff's case are set out below:

(3.) THE appellant/plaintiff has failed to start the work after having deleted the matter, the appellant has chosen to state that because of the encroachment and all other reasons projected by him, the delay has occurred and the reasons are all false one. Before the submission of his tender, a duty is caused on the appellant/plaintiff to satisfy and verify himself in regard to the hard rock and the depth. When the hard rock depth has been found out beyond 6 metres, the Chief Engineer has revised the rate and the excess amount has also been paid and the accounts have been settled. In regard to the flood silting and earth slips and structural collapse are concerned, these are all Acts of God and hence, the respondents are not responsible for these happenings, the respondents are not liable to pay the amount of Rs.23,323.06 towards silt clearance work and it is outside the scope of the agreement. THEre has been no agreement for making payment towards silt clearance and as such, the claim of the appellant is arbitrary and a baseless one. THE appellant has not spent a large amount of Rs.23,323.06 towards silt clearance and that the expenditure incurred in this regard he has to bear the same by himself and he cannot pass on the buck on the respondents. In view of the provision contained in the agreement itself to which the appellant is a party, the appellant is not entitled to turn round and make the claim.