DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. MITTAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A work order was issued by the Delhi Development Authority in favour of the respondent by order dated 4th December, 1980. In the said contract, the time allotted for carrying out and completion of the work was 15 months which was to be reckoned from the 10th day of the issuance of the award letter. The work order was issued on 4th December, 1980 and as such the starting time for the work was to be reckoned from 14th December, 1980 and the work was stipulated to be completed by 13th March, 1982. The respondent started the work at the site earmarked for the project but the respondent was asked to shift to another site. It is pointed out from the records filed by the DDA that intimation was sent intimating about the change of site, on 4th January, 1981. The aforesaid position is also supported and confirmed by letter dated 8th January, 1981 written by the respondent, which is document No.R-30, in which it was indicated that the respondent had to incur an expenditure of Rs.3,000/- due to the decision of the department to change the site.

(2.) Therefore, the respondent was intimated about the change of the site more or less in and around 4th January, 1981. The Delhi Development Authority rescinded the contract on 15th January, 1982 by serving a notice on the contractor under Clause (2) & (3) of the agreement. A show cause notice under Clause (3) of the agreement dated 5th August, 1981 was also served upon the respondent/objector as against which the respondent/objector submitted a reply dated 12th August, 1981 and gave a programme and assured the department that he would complete the work of 15 nos. block by December, 1981. However, it appears that the respondent abandoned the the work on 29th September, 1981. Thereafter, again a further notice dated 30th December, 1981 was issued under Clause 3, on the respondent/objector to show cause. The said notice was received by the respondent on 5th January, 1982. The respondent failed to send a reply to the said show cause notice and accordingly the petitioner proceeded to rescind the contract. The decision of rescinding the contract was conveyed to the respondent vide Regd.A.D letter dated 15th January, 1982 and the letter for final measurement of the work was sent on 25th January, 1982 but the same was returned with the endorsement 'refused'. After rescinding the aforesaid contract the remaining portion of the work was got done through other agency due to which DDA suffered a huge loss, which was sought to be compensated by the respondent.

(3.) Since disputes arose between the parties in connection with and/or out of the aforesaid contract, Sh.R.S.Yadav, Surveyor-Works (Slum Wing)DDA was appointed as the sole arbitrator vide letter dated 24th March, 1983 and Clause (4) of the agreement. The parties hereto submitted their claims and counter-claims before the learned arbitrator. The respondent submitted seven claims, whereas the petitioner submitted Counter-Claim Nos.1 to 5. The learned arbitrator passed his award on 30th November, 1983.