KALYAN CHANDRA GOYAL AND CO. Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SOUTHERN WESTERN DIVISION-8, DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are objections preferred by the Defendant/DDA under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 against the award dated 22.11.2008 made by the Sole Arbitrator Mr. S.C. Kapoor. This award has been made by the learned arbitrator in pursuance of the order dated 23.07.2007 passed by this Court in CS(OS) No. 2805/1995, whereby the Court set aside the award made on claim Nos. 5, 8 and 11 and remitted the said claims for re-adjudication by the learned arbitrator. The Defendant/DDA challenges the award now made on all the three remitted claims.

(2.) Claim No. 5 had been made by the Petitioner/contractor to claim loss of profit @ 10%, amounting to 2 lacs on the value of the work that the Petitioner could not execute as the contract was rescinded by the Respondent. The learned Arbitrator observes that the Petitioner did not give any details. He assessed the damages payable to the Petitioner to be 20% of the claimed amount, i.e. 40,000/- only. Consequently, he awarded 40,000/- in favour of the Petitioner/claimant under this claim.

(3.) The submission of Mr. Bhupesh Narula, learned Counsel for the DDA is that the learned Arbitrator has mis-conducted the proceedings and the award made by him is without jurisdiction. He points out that under Clause 13 of the agreement between the parties, it is specifically provided as under: