S.DINESH BABU Vs. C.VENUGOPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What is meant by the expressions "ex aequo et bono" and "amiable compositeur" in the context of Section 28(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')? Answer to this question is essential for the proper disposal of this appeal.

(2.) The appellant is a chartered engineer and contractor. The first respondent is an officer of a bank. He wanted to construct a residential building. He entered into an agreement with the appellant on 02.05.1996 for construction of the building. The proposed building had a plinth area of 1443 sq.ft. The rate agreed upon between the parties was Rs.315/- per sq.ft. The construction of the building had to be completed within a period of eight months from the date of approval of the plan by the local authority. The appellant could not complete the work within the stipulated period due to various reasons. Then, disputes arose between the parties with regard to the amount to be paid to each other on breach/termination of the agreement.

(3.) As per the order dated 17.03.1999 in A.R.No.12/1998 filed by the first respondent, this Court appointed a retired District Judge as the sole arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties. The parties adduced evidence before the arbitrator. CW1 and CW2 were examined and Exts.C1 to C14 documents were marked on the side of the first respondent/claimant. RW1 was examined and Exts.R1 to R6 documents were marked on the side of the appellant.