SUCHITA STEEL INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application raises the objections under Sections 30 & 33 of the Arbitration Act 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on behalf of the respondent/objector/ Northern Railways through Union of India to the Award dated 30th October 2000 which was corrected on 31st October 2000. While several objections were raised in this petition the only objection seriously pressed into service during arguments by the learned counsel for the respondents was that his plea regarding the interpretation of the effect of the price variation clause by the learned arbitrator.

(2.) The brief facts of the case averred by the petitioner are :

(3.) This claim has been upheld by the arbitrator while dealing with the claim of the petitioner in para 7.2.1 and he has taken into account the policy instructions issued by the Executive Director, Railway Board and the modifications to the purchase order issued by the Central Railways and the Western Railways to the effect that the SAIL's price announcement shall be applicable for JPC's price announcement. These policy instructions have been held to be applicable. The arbitrator has followed the instructions of the Railway Board and two constituents of the Indian Railways, namely, Central Railways and Western Railways and no legal error amenable to interference by virtue of the objections raised under Sections 30 and 33 of the Act can be found in the Award. The petitioner's claim is based solely upon the policy guidelines issued by the Railway Board as well as that of Central Railways and the Western Railways. Furthermore, it is not some fanciful or arbitrary figure which have been adopted by the arbitrator but the prices fixed taken by SAIL, a public sector undertaking, which was a major constituent of the JPC.