SURINDER KUMAR Vs. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE work regarding construction of community NNcentre at Malcha Marg. New Delhi was entrusted by the Executive Engineer (H) NDMC on behalf of New Delhi Municipal Committee vide his letter dated 7.11.1986 and Agreement No., EE(H)/14/1986/87 was entered into between the parties in this regard. Certain disputes arose in respect of the contracted work and the claimant Surender Kumar vide letter dated 2.1.89 invoked the provisions of clause 25 of the agreement and requested the Administrator New. Delhi Municipal Committee to appoint an arbitrator to settle the disputes. THE Administrator New Delhi Municipal Committee vide his letter No. EE(C-III)/AB/116-18 dated 19.1.89 appointed Shri R.S. Gupta, former Engineer Member DDA and retired Chief Engineer CPWD to decide the disputes and to make a reasoned award regarding the claims as per the statement enclosed with 19.1.89.

(2.) THE Arbitrator entered upon the reference on 23.1.1989. THE petitioner submitted 16 claims in the form of Memo of Claims before the Arbitrator which are as under :

(3.) REGARDING the claim of future interest under claim No. 14, the counsel submitted that respondent had already deposited a sum of Rs. 4,91,827.65 by moving an application which amount is lying deposited in this court and as such the liability of the respondent to pay interest on the amount awarded ceases. From the record it is apparent and it is also not disputed that the stipulated date of completion of work was 16.11.87 and it was actually completed on 27.7.88. There is also no dispute that some additional work was got executed from the contractor and he was to get extra payment for that extra work. Without going into the dispute, which is a matter of fact whether the delay in completing the work was on account of fault of the officials of the NDMC or on the part of the contractor, the Arbitrator gave his finding on the basis of the fact that it was on account of the fault of the officials of NDMC which resulted in delay in the completion of work. The contractror has based most of his claims under these items on account of delayed completion of work. A perusal of the award shows that in claim No.6, the Arbitrator awarded Rs. l,40,682.00 as an increase of 20% over and above the contract rate for the work executed in the extended period.