STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. RAM DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Before us there are two sets of appeals, one, C. A. Nos. 4542-4544/1998 at the instance of State Bank of India and other, C. A. Nos. 4545-4547/1998 at the instance of the respondent-Contractor.

(2.) On 6th of October, 1978, the State bank of India entered into an agreement with the respondent herein (Contractor) for constructing local Head Office building at hyderabad. Clause 36 of the agreement provided for resolution of disputes by arbitration. It is not disputed that in the year 1982 the contractor completed the constructions in terms of the contract. However, certain disputes arose between the parties as a result whereof the matter was referred to arbitration. Mr. MU Hattikuddur was chosen by the Arbitrators as an Umpire, on 8.8.1984 the Umpire gave an award wherein four claims of the contractor were allowed in full, seven claims were allowed in part and 15 claims were rejected. A total sum of Rs. 15.85 lacs were found to be payable by the appellant to the Contractor under the said award. The Umpire, however, also rejected the counter-claim of the appellant.

(3.) It is not disputed that the umpire in the year 1985 himself filed the award in the City civil Court, Hyderabad for making the award the rule of Court. It is also not disputed that the Umpire appointed a lawyer for prosecuting the proceedings. The said suit was numbered as Original Suit No. 191/1985. The appellant herein filed an objection before the city Civil Court for setting aside the award under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act. The respondent filed his counter affidavit to the objections of the appellant herein. The umpire also filed an affidavit to the objection filed by the appellant. It is furthermore not disputed that the appellant did not raise any plea in its objection as regards bias against the umpire.