- (1.) The Court : The more important consideration in this appeal is the quantum of costs that should be imposed on the appellant.
(2.) The appellant has a contract with the railways for construction of a part of a Metro Railway project near the airport. The appellant asserts that the appellant has remained unpaid for a long time and upon the appellant insisting on its running account bills being cleared and dues in excess of Rs.3 crore being paid by the railways, the railways resorted to a specious plea of alleged overpayment having been made to the appellant to deny any further payment.
(3.) The appellant maintains that a contractor cannot be expected to continue with the work without being paid therefor. The appellant insists that the railways being in a superior position, have arm-twisted the appellant into completing a substantial part of the work and it is only because of the complete failure on the part of the railways to release payment and the unjust manner in which a refund has been sought that the appellant has been constrained to stop further work.;