GLOBAL CONTRACT SERVICES Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application, respondent-objector/DDA has filed objections under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as "Act 1940") to the Award dated 04th August, 1997 made and published by Mr. A.C. Panchdhari, the sole Arbitrator. The respondent-objector has challenged the said Award to the extent it awards Claims No. 2 to 5, 7 to 13 as well as 16 and 17.

(2.) Ms. Anusuya Salwan, learned Counsel for respondent-objector stated that the Arbitrator had erroneously awarded a sum of Rs. 69,737/- against Claim No. 2 for straightening of steel reinforcement. She submitted that the petitioner-claimant's rationale that cutting and straightening was an additional item, was contrary to the contract/agreement in particular Clause 42(ix) of the Agreement dated 1st October, 1984 which is reproduced hereinbelow:

(3.) Ms. Salwan further stated that the petitioner-claimant had not issued any notice during the currency of the contract and, therefore, the said claim on account of cutting and straightening was not maintainable. In this connection, Ms. Salwan relied upon the judgments of this Court in Wee Aar Constructive Builders v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr, 2001 4 AD(Del) 65; Pt. Munshi Ram & Associates (P) Ltd. v. Delhi Development Authority, 2006 1 ArbLR 137 (Delhi) and Anant Raj Agencies v. D.D.A. and Anr, 2005 1 ArbLR 590 (Delhi).