U KASHYAP Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Sections 14, 17 and 18 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 filed by the petitioner. On a notice of filing of the award by the Arbitrator, Respondent No. 3, in the Court, being served on the Respondents 1 and 2, the Respondents 1 and 2 filed the objections to the Award dated 31.1.91 published by Shri R.C.Bakhru, the Sole Arbitrator. The said objections were registered as I.A.505/91.

(2.) COUNSEL for the Objector has objected to the award only in respect of three claims, namely. Claims No.1, 11 and 14.

(3.) ON Claim No.l4, the main objection of the Counsel for the objector is that no details of the working are available on the face of the award and it is absolutely vague and one cannot make as to how a sum of Rs.70,400.00 has been granted in favour of the plaintiff. Counsel for the claimant has drawn my attention to various documents including statement of claim and has worked out the details and has pointed out that the Arbitrator has not allowed any compensation for the tools, plant and machinery and has given the compensation of site establishment only and that too only upto September 1986 and not upto April 1987 as was claimed. ON the basis of Rs. 5200.00 per month multiplied by 13 months, according to the Counsel, this amount comes to approximately Rs.70,000.00 and not Rs.70,400.00 . There does appear to be some ambiguity. I think, the Arbitrator is the best person to sort out this and no reasons are given for awarding Rs.70,400.00 . As such, the award on claim No.l4 is set aside and is remitted back to the Arbitrator.