ABDUL JABBAR Vs. SECRETARY R D BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was the contractor for the construction of shopping centre at Vallikudi Panchayat under the terms of the agreement dated 14-7-1978. THE work was to be completed by 5-1-1979. As the work was not completed within the time the agreement was cancelled by notice dated 22-9-1979. THE dispute that arose on the claims made by the appellant was referred for arbitration. THE second respondent, the Executive Engineer preferred counter claim. THE third respondent Arbitrator filed the award in court. A decree in terms of the award was granted by the court rejecting the objections raised by the appellant. THE appeal is directed against that order of the lower court dated 19-12-1981 in O. P. (Arbitration) No. 78 of 1981.

(2.) ONE of the claims made by the appellant was that the respondents may be directed to receive back the balance departmental materials from the site and the appellant may be liable for damages if any caused to the materials due to the lapse of time. This claim was not allowed pointing out that the claimant did not avail of the opportunity to return the materials to the respondents after the preliminary hearing. The appellant claimed Rs. 20,000/- as compensation for the loss of form work and stagging materials and materials stacked for concreting as item No. 1. The Arbitrator awarded the amount of Rs. 2000/- under this item. Regarding the counter claim the award is that the Respondent shall be entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 34,704. 30 towards cost of materials issued to the claimant but not returned by him to be stored. The award is a non-speaking award. The appellant sought to have the award set aside for the reason that the Arbitrator acted without jurisdiction and the award is vitiated by error of law apparent on the face of the record.

(3.) THE first contention that the claims were not raised before the Rural Development Board and had not ripened into a dispute for reference to the Arbitrator cannot be countenanced. No such objection regarding jurisdiction has been taken up before the lower court. THE appellant who had participated in the proceedings before the Arbitrator without any protest thereby waiving the objection, if any, relating to jurisdiction is estopped from raising such an objection before this Court for the first time in appeal. We, therefore, reject that contention.