Best Construction & Infrastructure Contract Arbitration Lawyer

Construction contracts break down in familiar ways. The site is handed over late. Drawings keep changing. Extra items are ordered by email and never priced. Running bills are short-paid, retention money is held back, and at the end the employer deducts liquidated damages for a delay it caused. Most construction and infrastructure contracts send these disputes to arbitration.

This page is for contractors, sub-contractors, EPC companies, developers and project owners in private and public projects. A construction arbitration is document-heavy. Claims are won on the hindrance register, letters, minutes and measurement records, not on general statements that "the employer delayed". A contested claim usually takes one to two years before a tribunal, depending on the number of claims and witnesses.

We prepare and defend construction claims, starting from the contract and the site record, and handle the court applications around them, including urgent protection of bank guarantees.

Is this your situation?

Common construction claims

Delay claims: who caused the delay, and what does the contract say?

Almost every construction arbitration turns on delay. The employer says the contractor was slow and deducts liquidated damages. The contractor says it was held up by late site handover, late drawings, design changes, delayed approvals and late payments, and claims extension of time and prolongation costs.

The tribunal will want to see which events caused delay to the completion date, as opposed to delays to non-critical activities. For larger projects, a delay analysis based on the programme is often needed, sometimes with an expert. For smaller projects, a careful chronology from the hindrance register, letters and minutes may be enough. The key is contemporaneous evidence: records made at the time, not reconstructions years later.

Liquidated damages clauses are interpreted under Section 74 of the Contract Act. After Kailash Nath Associates v DDA (2015), an employer can recover only reasonable compensation up to the stated amount, and where loss can be proved, it must be shown. In public works, where loss is hard to quantify, the stated amount may be treated as a genuine pre-estimate. But an employer that caused the delay, or granted extensions without reserving LD, may lose the right to deduct.

Where the contract says time extensions are the contractor's only remedy for delay, and bars monetary compensation, tribunals often still award costs for delays caused by the employer's breaches. Courts have been reluctant to interfere with such findings in Section 34 proceedings, provided the tribunal reasoned through the clause.

How we build a construction claim

Time and typical cost range

Arbitrators' fees in construction cases can be significant, because claims are large. Our fees are agreed in writing at the start, stage by stage, and are not linked to the result.

Documents to gather

Where construction disputes go

Escalation and price variation

Most longer contracts have a price variation clause linking payment to indices for cement, steel, fuel, labour and other inputs. Disputes arise when the employer applies the formula wrongly, freezes escalation at the original completion date, or refuses it after an extension.

Where the contract has a formula, the claim is largely arithmetic, and the question is which indices and base dates apply. Where the contract has no escalation clause, or caps it, the contractor may still claim increased costs as damages if the delay was caused by the employer. Tribunals have awarded such damages, and courts have usually upheld them where reasoned.

A frequent point is whether escalation is payable for work done during an extension granted "without financial implication". Contractors who accepted such extensions without protest may have difficulty. If an extension letter says this, reply in writing reserving your claims before you continue work.

Termination, take-over and encashment

When an employer terminates a construction contract, it often encashes performance and mobilisation guarantees, takes over materials and plant at site, and gets the balance work done through another contractor at the original contractor's "risk and cost". Each of these steps can be challenged.

Termination must follow the contract's notice and cure provisions. A termination without a valid notice period, or for reasons the employer itself caused, may be wrongful. If it is wrongful, the contractor can claim loss of profit on the balance work, return of materials and plant or their value, and refund of encashed guarantees. Risk-and-cost claims by the employer must be proved with the actual cost of completing the original scope, not an enlarged one.

Bank guarantee encashment is hard to stop, because courts treat guarantees as independent. But where the employer's own letters undermine its invocation, or the invocation does not follow the guarantee's terms, urgent relief is possible. See bank guarantee disputes.

For employers and developers

Employers often face claims built on a large number of heads, many of them overlapping. A good defence starts by matching each head to the contract clause that governs it, identifying claims barred by the contract (such as no-damages-for-delay clauses or claims not notified in time), testing quantum against actual records, and preparing a counter-claim for defects, delays and risk-and-cost amounts. Contractors' own correspondence often contains admissions about their delays.

Public sector employers should also keep the deposit and stay rules in view if an award goes against them. Courts apply the same principles as for money decrees. See government contract arbitration.

Laws that apply

How we work

We are a litigation and advisory practice led by Advocate BK Singh, with offices in Dwarka (New Delhi) and Vaishali (Ghaziabad). This is what you can expect:

• Record-driven claims: we work through the site record with your engineers.
• Realistic quantum: claims priced on evidence, not hopes.
• Guarantee protection: urgent applications prepared when guarantees are at risk.
• Experience on both sides: contractors, sub-contractors and employers.
• Written fee terms: agreed stage by stage, never linked to the outcome.

Mistakes contractors make

Retention money, security deposit and the final bill

The last 5% to 10% of a construction contract is often the hardest to collect. Retention money is held back from each running bill until the defects liability period ends. Security deposits and performance guarantees are held until the employer certifies that defects have been put right. Final bills sit unprocessed while the employer raises new complaints.

The contract usually says when retention becomes payable: on completion, on issue of a taking-over certificate, or at the end of the defects liability period. If that date has passed and the employer has not identified specific defects in writing, the claim is usually straightforward. Interest on delayed release can also be claimed, subject to the contract.

Final bill disputes often involve the employer reducing quantities measured during the work, or applying deductions it never raised earlier. Measurements recorded in the measurement book and signed by the employer's engineer carry weight. Reductions made later, without a joint re-measurement, are vulnerable.

Contractors are sometimes asked to sign a "no dues" or "no claim" certificate before the final bill is released. Tribunals look at whether such a certificate was a genuine settlement or was extracted as a condition of payment. In several cases, courts have upheld awards that ignored certificates signed under financial pressure. Still, the safer course is to write separately, the same day, that the certificate is signed under protest to obtain payment and that your claims are reserved.

Experts and evidence in construction cases

Construction tribunals are often made up of a retired judge and one or two technical members, such as retired chief engineers. They understand site realities, but they still decide on evidence.

Witness statements from the project manager, site engineer and billing engineer explain what happened and introduce the records. For large claims, a delay expert analyses the programme to show which events affected the completion date, and a quantum expert prices the claims. Experts' fees add to cost, so we use them where the size and complexity of the claim justify it.

Photographs, drone images, test reports, weather data and labour attendance records can all help. Most of all, the tribunal will be persuaded by letters written at the time that tell the same story you are telling now. If you are still on site, start writing those letters today: each hindrance, each changed drawing, each late payment, recorded in a short letter to the employer with a copy kept.

Government and PSU construction contracts

Contracts with NHAI, CPWD, state PWDs, railways, metro corporations and municipal bodies follow standard forms with their own dispute clauses. Some still provide for a sole arbitrator nominated by a senior officer of the department, which raises the issues discussed on appointment of arbitrator. Many NHAI contracts provide for a three-member tribunal, with conciliation through a committee first.

Public sector employers commonly challenge adverse awards under Section 34 and then appeal under Section 37. Courts insist on deposit of the awarded amount, or a substantial part, as a condition of stay, applying Pam Developments (2019). Union government guidelines allow payment of a part of the awarded amount against a bank guarantee pending challenge in some categories. Contractors with large public works claims should plan for this longer path from the outset. See government contract arbitration.