TOMKOS ENGINEER & CONTRACTORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT herein was the respondent in O.P. (Arb) No. 229/90. Respondents filed a petition under Ss. 16 and 30 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award passed by the Arbitrator. The second respondent invited tenders for the work of Design; Fabrication, Supply, Erection and Commissioning of Assembly Tower at Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle Project, Valiamala Complex, Nedumangad. The appellant quoted for the work and the same was awarded to him. The contract period was originally stipulated as 9 months from 14.9.1984 and the price of the work was also stipulated. According to the appellant immediately after the award of the work they went to execute the work with necessary men and machinery. But because of the default in performing the obligations of the respondents the work could not be completed as originally scheduled and there was delay in completion of the work. Therefore, the appellant requested that in view of the delay caused on the part of the respondents an amount of Rs. 26,66,711.10 should be paid. Since the matter was not settled, it was referred for arbitration. A copy of the concerned agreement was produced by the respondents along with the counter affidavit as Annexure -Rl. Clause 9 of Annexure Rl agreement provides for settlement of disputes by arbitration. The above clause reads as follows:

(2.) AS a settlement could not be reached between the parties, the appellant invoked the Arbitration Clause in the agreement and filed O.S. (Arb) No. 205/87 before the Sub Court, Trivandrum for referring the disputes for arbitration. The disputes which have to be settled by the Arbitrator were specifically stated in the suit which are as follows:

(3.) WHAT is the extra expenditure incurred by the plaintiff and payable by the defendants on account of the transportation charges from the storage and fabrication site to the base of the assembly tower.