R S BUILDERS Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Arbitrator appointed in a dispute between the petitioner and the respondent- DDA has made and published his Award on 4.8.1992 which has been filed in this Court. However, the DDA has its reservations about the validity of this Award and, therefore, these objections are filed under Section 30 and 33 of the Act against the said Award. I may say at the outset that though objections are raised qua almost all the claims, most of these objections touch the merits of those claims and do not fall within the ambit and scope of Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act. The Arbitrator has, after hearing the parties in detail and going through the documents, arrived at his conclusions and awarded certain specific amount to the petitioner herein. Therefore, the learned counsel for the respondent was candid in admitting that it is not for this Court to re-appreciate the evidence and labour to find out whether those findings are erroneous or not. This court is not sitting as Appellate Authority. The conclusions and findings of the Arbitrator are final and can be challenged only if there is some error apparent on the face of the record or Arbitrator has misconducted. No such infirmity could be shown.

(2.) The only serious argument raised was qua Claim No.2 and that needs consideration. Claim No.2 preferred by the petitioner was for a sum of Rs. 14,66,893.70p being the balance dues of the work done. The learned arbitrator has awarded a sum of Rs.11,86,039/- against this claim as this amount has been found to be justified. Even in respect of this claim dispute is only qua item no.1, that too limited to rate at which it is awarded and there is no dispute about the quantity. Item no.l was "Sub-grade preparation". Rate payable was Rs.138.38/-. The dispute is as to whether this rate was per sq. mtr. or per 100 sq. mtr. The quantity executed is 6466.60 sq. mtr. The learned arbitrator has awarded @ Rs.138.38 per sq.mtr. and the amount payable reckoning on that comes to Rs.8,97,564/-. The contention of the DDA is that the rate of Rs. 138.38 payable was for 100 sq.mtr. and if the contention of the DDA is correct, amount is awarded would be l/100th i.e. Rs.8975.64p. There is thus a wide variation in the perception. Who is correct is to be seen in the light of contractual provisions.

(3.) The learned arbitrator has, while awarding rate per sq. mtr. given the following reasons: