Comprehensive Guide to Most Common Construction and Infrastructure Claims in India - Part 1 - The Logic of Claims 

Theme: Project Closure, Module: Claims & Disputes

Author: Dr. Pradeep Reddy Sarvareddy

Published Date: 19 March 2026

This Guide explores the Claims in 5 parts.  Let us begin with Part 1 – The Logic of Claims

Most construction disputes arise from a combination of events which the Contractor and the Department struggle to handle.  But if we logically track our steps back, we can eliminate the disputes where possible or prepare better for the disputes, so that Contractors may recover their money.  This Guide is intended as a practical reference for contractors in India to understand:

  • the most common causes that lead to construction claims,
  • the typical effects these causes have on time, cost and performance, and
  • the corresponding claims that usually arise from these causes and effects.

With this understanding, Contractors can be better prepared legally to first negotiate with the Department for the Claims, or else escalate to a dispute adjudication before any Arbitration or Court.

The first step is “diagnostics” like a doctor, so that you prepare yourself like a legal professional.  Remember that without the legal teeth, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to win your “genuine claims”.  Any person that entered the world of infrastructure construction will learn most of these aspects within two or three years itself, but fails to win cases.  The reasons are that:

  • Construction disputes are technical,
  • These disputes are fact‑intensive (i.e., huge documentation),
  • Projects involve multiple Parties,
  • Contractors are focussed on completing the work rather than documentation, and
  • Most new Contractors think that they are facing “new problems”.

You need to understand that most of the problems or issues are “not new”, but highly predictable.  Almost all disputes follow a very well-known pattern and keep repeating across all types of projects like Item Rate, EPC or PPP projects.  These disputes have common claims even across all domains like roads, water & sewer, stormwater, irrigation, railways, Oil & Gas, Power sector, etc.

To learn these issues and the solutions, a very simple task that a Contractor can do from day one is hire a junior contract manager whose only job is to keep writing to the Department, every week.  I say “junior” because you may be budget conscious.  I say “contract manager” because his only role should be “documentation”.  So, someone with technical knowledge and about two years of experience is sufficient to help you out with 90% of the documentation.  For the remaining 10% aspects, you will need specialised techno-legal experts.

This is like insurance.  You pay someone about Rs. 50,000 per month, and his only task is Daily records, correspondence and formal notices that form the evidentiary foundation of any construction claim.  Without them, even genuine claims become difficult to sustain legally or to win.

Logical method of developing the Claims

To understand Construction claims, all you need is practical knowledge of the sequencing of works and logical mindset.  The Claims are not the “first” but in reality are actually the “third” as part of a regular pattern.  In simple terms, first “something happens” (known as the “Cause”), second step is that “the project is affected negatively” (known as the “Effect”) and third step is the “consequence” (known as the “Claim”).

Either consciously or subconsciously, Courts and Arbitrators apply the same trilogy of this framework.  Most people usually say “cause and effect” but subconsciously move on to the “consequence”.  In reality, most people “jump” and end up with “cause and consequence”, without capturing the “effect”.  Legally, this is known as “causation”, which is highly critical.

Consider a simple example

“I am allergic to caffeine. Therefore, I don’t drink coffee.”

At first glance, this sounds complete, but, legally something important is missing, i.e., the causation link. 

The correct logic is:

“I am allergic to caffeine. Coffee contains caffeine. Therefore, I don’t drink coffee.”

The middle step is critical, which explains “why the conclusion” is linked to the fact.

Construction claims work in exactly the same way.  It is not enough to say that something happened and then jump directly to a claim.  The link between what happened and what is being claimed must be clearly identified.  You may understand, but a non-technical person may not understand.

The Cause–Effect–Claim Framework

This Guide will help you “diagnose” your disputes logically (and simultaneously strengthen you legally).  Remember these three mantras:

  • Cause: what actually happened on the project
  • Effect: how that event impacted time, cost, productivity or operations
  • Claim: the contractual or legal consequence that flows from that impact

Many disputes fail because:

  • the cause is stated without clarity,
  • the effect is assumed rather than demonstrated, or
  • the claim is asserted without clearly linking it back to the effect.

The Missing Link: Causation

When you write a letter to the Department with the cause and the claim (i.e., without the effect), the Department may assume that you are being greedy or unreasonable.  But, if you can clearly explain the “effect” in your letter, this letter would be clearly understood by every stakeholder, like the Department, Engineers, Arbitrators and Judges.  Your simple letter, now becomes “evidence”. 

Most of the time, multiple issues occur simultaneously.  There will be delays, payment issue, environmental or forest approvals, etc.  Some of these issues overlap each other such as scope change, quality disputes, internal inefficiencies, etc.  When you try to mix everything together, the clarity is lost and no one wants to believe you.

So, to help you understand the problem, and help others understand your problem, separate the issues.  For each cause, prepare a separate effect and consequence.  You need not write hundreds of pages, but a simple table in one or two pages may be sufficient.  You may realise that some of the consequences are because of your own mistakes, which you should not pursue further, but improve so that next time such mistakes will not happen again.  But for the other consequences, you realise who is responsible and how much you are entitled to from such causes. 

Remember that every delay does not result in a consequence.  If your cement work is not yet complete, the delay in the arrival of painting material to the site will not result in any consequence.  Similarly, whenever you think of a Claim, first understand “cause”, i.e., what the event is about, who caused that event, why the event arose, etc.  Then, understand the “effect”, i.e., how was the project impacted, how long was the project impacted, what could have been done to avoid the impact on the project, etc.  Then, finally, understand the “consequence”, i.e., what will it take to resolve the issue (in terms of cost, quality and time).  You have now built a logically robust “claim”, which even Departments will find difficult to refuse.  

Claims are not aggressive actions or legal tactics.  Actually, Claims are the outcomes of cause and effect.

Another example

A contractor says: “There was rain.  Therefore, the work was delayed.”

This is incomplete reasoning.

Now try to apply the earlier logic, and you reach the correct logic:

“There was rain.  Bituminous Road of this specification cannot be laid during rain.  Therefore, bitumen road work was delayed.

The missing link explains why the event caused the effect.

Otherwise, you will be stuck in a legal battle, where everyone is looking into the definition of “weather” or “rain vs heavy rain”, etc. 

Most Common Reasons for Delay

Delays are common and give rise to several Claims.  So, let us have a quick look at some of the common reasons for the delay and the frequency of occurrence of such delays and who causes (i.e., who is attributable to) such delays.

Delays Attributable to the Contractor

High Occurrence

  • Poor site management and supervision
  • Contractor’s financial difficulties / cash‑flow constraints
  • Low productivity / slow work rates
  • Inadequate planning and scheduling
  • Failure to mobilise resources on time

 Moderate Occurrence

  • Delay in material procurement
  • Material management and storage issues
  • Labour shortages
  • Equipment shortages or frequent breakdowns
  • Delays by subcontractors
  • Slow or improper mobilisation

 Low Occurrence

  • Inadequate contractor experience
  • Poor coordination with other trades
  • Inadequate site inspection before commencement
  • Wrong sequencing of work
  • Re‑work due to execution errors
  • Accidents and safety incidents

Delays Attributable to the Employer / Department

 High Occurrence

  • Delay in handing over site (full or partial)
  • Delay in drawings, designs or specifications
  • Frequent changes in scope of work
  • Unrealistic contract durations
  • Inaccurate estimates or baseline assumptions
  • Delays in approvals affecting progress

 Moderate Occurrence

  • Slow decision‑making
  • Delays in financial approvals
  • Utility shifting delays
  • Inadequate coordination between departments
  • Delays in responding to contractor submissions
  • Delay in inspection, measurement, or certification

 Low Occurrence

  • Poor communication from Department
  • Department’s Design team’s inadequate supervision
  • Deficiencies in coordination among Department and its own agencies
  • Late issue of site instructions
  • Administrative bottlenecks

Delays Attributable to External Factors

 High Occurrence

  • Shortage of construction materials
  • Delays in statutory permits and clearances
  • Delays by other government agencies

 Moderate Occurrence

  • Unforeseen site conditions
  • Inclement or abnormal weather
  • Regulatory or statutory changes
  • Price fluctuations affecting supply chains
  • Disputes or conflicts affecting site access

 Low Occurrence

  • Civil disturbances or local resistance
  • Labour strikes
  • Problems with neighbouring properties
  • Confined or congested site conditions
  • Economic conditions
  • Force majeure / acts of God

Preliminary Conclusion

From this Section, I hope the logic is clear.  If you can read and understand the above aspects, you have won half the battle.  You may not need to approach Courts or Arbitrators for every Claim.  You may be able to persuade the Department and get your money.  Simple and elegant.

In the next sections, let us understand the most common Causes, the effects of such Causes, the consequences (or claims) related to each of those causes or effects, and finally let us summarise everything, along with further plan of Action.