MANAGING DIRECTOR AMBUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION LIMITED Vs. YESES INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging the Arbitral Award dtd. 27/7/2020 passed against the petitioner and in favour of the first respondent.

(2.) A Work Order dtd. 31/10/2006 was issued by the petitioner in favour of the first respondent for construction of a Common Facility Centre at Ambur. Thereafter, a contract dtd. 1/12/2006 was entered into between the petitioner and the first respondent in terms of the Work Order dtd. 31/10/2006. There arose disputes out of the Contract dtd. 1/12/2006 between the parties. The first respondent claimed that the petitioner had committed breach of contract and therefore, initiated arbitration proceedings in accordance with the Arbitration Clause contained in the Contract dtd. 1/12/2006. The first respondent claimed certain sums of money under various heads for the alleged breach of contract committed by the petitioner. This Court, under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appointed a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent arising out of the contract dtd. 1/12/2006. The Sole Arbitrator acted upon the reference and after hearing both the parties to the dispute, passed an Arbitral Award dtd. 27/7/2020 in favour of the first respondent against the petitioner, awarding certain sums of money in favour of the first respondent, which was payable by the petitioner. The details of the sums of money awarded in favour of the first respondent under various heads are as follows:

(3.) Aggrieved by the Arbitral award dtd. 27/7/2020 referred to supra, this petition has been filed by the first respondent in the Arbitration. At the outset, the claimant in the Arbitral proceedings had also separately challenged the very same Arbitral award in O.P. No.248 of 2021. Several opportunities were granted by this Court for the learned counsel for the petitioner in O.P. No.248 of 2021 to argue the matter. Despite the same, there was no representation on the side of the petitioner in O.P. No.248 of 2021 on various hearing dates. In view of the said fact, this Court had dismissed O.P. No.248 of 2021 for nonprosecution on 31/8/2023.