ENGINEER IN CHIEF Vs. RATAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the respondent no. 1 who is appearing in person.

(2.) We find, in this case, in the first award the amount awarded in favour of the respondent was about rupees 16 lacs. Thereafter, when another arbitrator was appointed by this Court, he awarded only about rupees 3 lacs in favour of the respondents. The question arose for the refund from the respondents. The objections are filed by the respondents to this second award so that the award is not made rule of court. On the last date, submission for the respondent was that he is entitled to rupees 16 lacs from the appellants. We directed the appellant to file a chart based on the award to show the correct position which has been filed. According to the appellants as per the chart, the amount is refundable from the respondents to the appellants which comes to about rupees 13 lacs 30 thousand. However, we want to make it clear, we are not making adjudication on this issue so that, it may not prejudice the respondents before the executing court.

(3.) So far objections to the award, we find the main and the central objection is that the time for making the award was by the 6/08/2000 and time was further extended from 8/08/2000, hence, the award itself is non est. It is not in dispute, time for four months has been extended by four months from 8.8.2000 for making the award and the award itself has been made on 6.12.2000 which is within the extended period. So, we do not find any merit in this submission. We have also heard respondent no. 1 in person and have gone through the other grounds raised in the objections, we do not find any sustainable ground is raised which calls for our interference. Accordingly, we make the award rule of the court and pass the decree in terms of the award.