In Brief
A contractor (C & C Constructions) agreed with IRCON to build road bridges under a contract containing clause 49.5, which bars claims for damages when delays are caused by the employer. After repeatedly seeking time extensions under that clause, the contractor gave formal written undertakings not to claim anything beyond price escalation. Two years later, the contractor claimed Rs 44.11 crores for delays. An arbitral tribunal rejected all claims based on clause 49.5. The Supreme Court upheld this dismissal, holding that the contractor was estopped by conduct from challenging the clause, having explicitly accepted it through conduct and solemn undertakings. The Court found the arbitrator's summary rejection justified and emphasized the limited scope of appellate review under arbitration law.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.