SRINIVASULU REDDY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been preferred against the judgment and order dtd. 1/3/2023 passed in W.P.No.41906 of 2018 whereby the petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

(2.) It is pertinent to mention briefly the material facts in the light of which the present controversy has arisen: The petitioner was allotted the contract for construction of a court complex at Kurnool on 5/5/2012 and an agreement came to be executed between the petitioner and the Superintending Engineer, R & B Circle, Kurnool, on 23/11/2012. According to Clause 46 of the contract so entered between the parties, price adjustment was envisaged for both increase and decrease in the prices for the works completed within the original agreement period. Clause 46.2 & 46.4 are relevant and are reproduced hereunder:

(3.) The agreement among others also envisaged resolution of disputes through arbitration in terms of Clause 23 of the said contract only if the amount in dispute was less than Rs.50,000.00. For facility of reference, Clause 23 of the said contract is reproduced hereunder: