Find a Lawyer

CHAIRMAN, WAPDA versus MUHAMMAD ALI KHAN

O VII, R 2 The plaintiff was awarded a contract to perform construction work to recover the money The defendant's authority paid the timely bill to the plaintiff based on the work it did, on the last bill presented by the plaintiff. The defendant did not pay because the plaintiff had submitted a bill for excessive measurement and not for the work actually done by him, that the completion of the work was deferred by the plaintiff. Plaintiff's emphasis was on non-payment of bills by the plaintiff and his work was not satisfactory, because on the basis of the plaintiff's measurement book the bill was prepared by the claimant who measured the work. Was created on the basis of The defendant's contractor and the plaintiff did not have access to intervene in the measurement book, and the bill presented by the plaintiff stated that the defendant's dispute regarding the delay in completing the work by the plaintiff was disputed. May also be suspended because the contract was extended by the defendants. The record on the evidence proves that the work was delayed due to the plaintiff's failure to identify the platform and drainage, so that a reminder was issued that the plaintiff's work was not satisfactory. He had no power because there was no proof. It highlights that such a fight could, under the circumstances, be found to be a halt to the two courts below. The case was properly decided and in the absence of any false advertising, such courts or any court Defective jurisdiction of the jurisdiction, the simultaneous decision and the failure of the lower court to read the evidence through the High Court best law firms from Mangal Sada lawyer