In Brief
A construction company contracted to build a compound wall and underground sump. During excavation, unexpected seepage and soil conditions required digging to greater depths and additional work. The respondent asked the contractor to stop work pending revised designs. The trial court found extra work was done and awarded compensation of Rs. 3,23,000. The High Court reversed this, citing the contract clause requiring written approval for extra work. The Supreme Court restored the trial court judgment, holding that when site conditions fundamentally changed and the respondent engaged an architect for revised designs (evidencing awareness of changed nature of work), strict adherence to the written variation clause was not warranted. Interest was reduced from 12% to 6% per annum.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.