BHARAT LAL Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the petition for making the award rule of the Court. Respondent filed its objections to the award being made rule of the Court. Award in this case was made by Mr. Banarasi Dass. Super intending Engineer of the respondent on 7-6-1991.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, has contended that the award under Claim Nos. 5, 6 and Additional Claim No. 7 is based on no evidence and no reasons whatsoever have been given by the Arbitrator for making the award and, therefore, the award be set-aside.

(3.) Yet another contention raised by the learned counsel for the respondent is that the award under Additional Claim No. 2 could not have been granted to the claimant petitioner as in terms of Clause 2 of the agreement a penalty was levied on claimant-petitioner. Lastly learned counsel for the respondent has contended that by not awarding the counter claim No. 3 by which the respondent has claimed a sum of Rs. 29,895.00 towards compensation levied by the competent authority due to non-completion of work by the claimant. Arbitrator has misconducted the proceedings.