UNION OF INDIA Vs. SURINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : Admit. '

(2.) THIS is an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge dated December 19, 1994 whereby the application' of the appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code read with section 151 thereof has been dismissed. The facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are as follows:-

(3.) WE have eonsidered the submissious of the learned counsel for the parties. It is not disputed on both sides that the Executive Engneer, Ghaziabad Central Division, C.P.W.D. Hindon Airforce- Station being the Engineer-in-charge of the work signed the agreement on behalf of the President of India as per clause 2(e) of the conditions of Contract. According to the said clause Engineer-in- charge was made incharge of the work and was empowered to supervise the same. It can not also be disputed that the Executive Engineer represented the Union of India before the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator entered upon reference on January 15, 1993 and issued notice to the Executive Engineer, Ghaziabad Central Division, C.P.W.D. A perusal of the record of the Arbitrator shows that the respondent-claimant was sen-ding copie's of the papers filed by him before the Arbitrator to the Executive Engineer, thus recognizing the fact that the Executive Engineer was representing the Union of India in the arbitration proceedings. For the purpose of illustration letter of the respondent dated February 16, 1993 addressed to the Arbitrator, a copy whereof was sent to -Executive Engineer is reproduced below :-