D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) THE defendants / appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 7.7.2000 and its corresponding decree dated 15.7.2000, passed in Title Suit No. 45 of 1999, whereby the learned court below decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent, directing the defendants / appellants to pay a sum of Rs. 2,85,389/ - together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum to the plaintiff/ respondent.
(2.) THE suit was filed by the plaintiff / respondent for the declaration that amount of Rs. 2,85,389/ -, claimed by the plaintiff, is payable to him as approved and awarded on 20.12.1997 by the Superintending Engineer / designated Arbitrator (defendant No. 4) and for a decree in terms of the Award, together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The plaintiff is a registered contractor, whereas the defendants No. 2 to 6 are the officers of N.H. wing of P.W.D. (Road) Department under the State Government. The case of the plaintiff / respondent is that under separate agreements executed between 1978 -79, 1980 -81 and 1981 -82, the plaintiff was awarded contract for construction of Highway roads under the P.W.D. Department. The plaintiff executed work as per the terms of the agreements. In addition to the - works specified in the agreements, the plaintiff Was called upon to execute extra work under the provisions of Clause -23 of the agreement on payment of extra cost. The plaintiff executed the extra work, the details of which were entered into the measurement book by the concerned engineers of the Public Works Department and the extra work which was executed, was duly certified and confirmed by the concerned officer of the Department. The plaintiff thereupon raised a Bill for payment of Rs. 2,85,389/ - toward:; cost of the extra work and submitted the same to the Engineer who was the in -charge of the Department. The plaintiffs further claim is that the Superintending Engineer (defendant No. 4) who is also the designated Arbitrator, as per Clause -23 of the Agreement, had approved the plaintiffs claim vide his order dated 20.12.1997 and had also sought for funds from his superior officer to enable payment of the amount of the plaintiff. The plaintiff issued notices to the defendants on 3.3.1997, 12.9.1997 and lastly on 20.12.1997 to make payment of the Bill to satisfy the plaintiffs claim for payment of Rs. 2,85,389/ -, but the same was not paid and hence, the suit.
(3.) THE defendants/appellants had contested the suit mainly on the ground that the suit is not maintainable under the provisions of Indian Contract Act as also under the provisions of Arbitration Act of 1940 since the Act was repealed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and further, that the suit is barred by limitation and also by the principle of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence. Defendants have pleaded that the plaint itself was liable to be rejected under the provisions of Order 7 Rule I C.P.C. as because, it docs not contain the specific date of cause of action, nor does it contain any averment regarding the valuation of the suit. The defendants have further pleaded that the plaintiff was awarded contract job of road construction under different agreements and, after completion of the job, the plaintiff was paid of in full and final satisfaction of his entire dues which he had received without any murmur. The plaintiff having received his dues as full and final payments, without any protest, is estopped from making any further claim of money. The defendants also denied and disputed the plaintiffs claim of executing any extra work, on the ground that the plaintiff has failed to produce any paper or documents of approval of the Chief Engineer in respect of the extra work done by the plaintiff, if any, and therefore, the plaintiffs claim is not maintainable. It is also pleaded that the defendants have never admitted or acknowledged any debt in favour of the plaintiff and the alleged acknowledgment of the defendant No. 4 cannot bind the defendant No. 1, nor can it be claimed as the basis, for the plaintiff, to claim for payment of money to him.;