KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. VARKEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is by the Kerala State Electricity Board, the defendant in the lower court, under S. 39 of the Arbitration Act, against an order of the court below refusing to set aside an award by an Arbitrator made on a reference by court on the differences and disputes between the parties. In this judgment the plaintiff is referred to as the contractor and the defendant as the Electricity Board. THE contractor entered into an agreement dated 26-9-197 3 with the Electricity Board for the work of "idukki H. E. P. Cement concrete filling and allied works behind steel liners in B. V. C. area, upper elbow points, surge bottom. Headrace portion etc". Under the above agreement, two items of work were entrusted to the plaintiff-contractor. THE first item is: "concrete filling behind steel liners using 40mm graded metal including mixing by means of concrete mixers, laying, consolidating using vibrators, cost of form works and scaffolding curing, furnishing, all diversions, drainage and dewatering charges etc. , completed as per specification". THE second item of work was providing M. S. reinforcement for the concrete work whenever necessary. This work, as specified in the agreement, was later found unsuitable and had to be done in a different pattern; and it was done through another agency. In view of that we are not concerned with that item of work in these proceedings.

(2.) THE nature and mode of execution of the work is as follows:-M/s. Giovanola Binny Ltd. was entrusted with the work of laying penstock and steel liners through the underground tunnel connecting the reservoir dam with the power house at Moolamattom. THE steel liners or pipes are 5 or 7 metres long and has a diameter of 4 metres. THEy would lay the pipes one after the other within the tunnel as per specifications. After each pipe is fixed in position, the space between all-round the pipe and the tunnel had to be firmly filled with concrete. After the concreting is complete, Giovanola would lay the next pipe, fix it properly and connect it to the former one by welding. After that, concrete is filled between alround that pipe and the tunnel. THE work of concreting was entrusted to the contractor and the execution of the work required complete co-operation between Giovanola and the concreting contractors.

(3.) WHAT, if any, is the. amount due to the plaintiff from the defendant for the work of excavation and removing the consolidated muck near surge shaft, pursuant to the above agreement done by him.