SWADESHI CONSTRUCTION CO. Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DTTDC LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I .A. No. 7727/97 in Suit No. 395A/97 is the application/objections filed under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 against the award of the sole Arbitrator dated 27.11.1996.

(2.) THE main argument which has been pressed by the counsel appearing for the objector is that the Arbitrator failed to give hearing and did not allow any evidence to be led. This is averred in ground D in the I.A. When I put it to the counsel that whether an application was moved before the Arbitrator as to whether any evidence is required to be lead or that the Arbitrator is not giving hearing, the counsel replied in negative. I find that this ground is indeed very expansive and vague. It is not possible for the Arbitrator, who is not present in the proceedings to defend himself with respect to such a ground. I do not find any merit in this ground because if this objection was legitimate, surely, immediately after the award was passed the objector should have moved before the Arbitrator stating that adequate hearing was not given and opportunity for leading evidence was also not given. Admittedly, this has not been done and therefore there is no basis to sustain this objection which is accordingly rejected. The counsel for the objector thereafter has argued that the award is against the terms of the contract between the parties, however, on the query from the court the counsel could not point out any specific violation of the terms of the contract or how the award in this behalf is perverse or how the award can be assailed. Accordingly, this Court is unable to accept this objection.