NARAINDAS R ISRANI Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The objections under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act only) are directed against an award dated 5.1.1994 by which the Arbitrator upheld certain claims of petitioner against the respondent-objector.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the objection petition, briefly stated, are that the claimant-petitioner had entered into an agreement No.8EE/V/76-77 with respondent-objector in regard to the construction of a Higher Secondary School at Seema Puri, Delhi. In view of the arbitration Clause, as contained in Clause 25 of the Agreement, the disputes between the parties were referred to the sole Arbitrator who entered upon the reference and after hearing the parties and examining the material placed before him made the impugned award dated 5.1.1994.

(3.) The claimant-petitioner prays for making the Award Rule of the Court whereas the respondent-objector by its objection petition pleads that under claim No.3 the petitioner was not entitled to any interest as the payments had been made within the time frame; that in Claims No.4 and 5 also there was an error apparent on the face of the award as Annexure R-10 had already been placed on record but still the Arbitrator observed that there was no comment from the side of the respondent-objector. It was also pleaded that in respect of claims No.6 and 8 the raise of 109 per cent for calculating damages towards esclation of the costs was not justified and this esclation could not be taken from the first month itself. The award of Claim No.10 was assailed on the ground that the claimant-petitioner had not asked for interest on security but still it was awarded. It was also pleaded that the rate of interest awarded by the arbitrator was too high.