(1.) A contract was awarded in favour of the first respondent by the petitioners as per the Agreement dated 19.12.2001 on 30.11.2001. Time was fixed for completion of the contract as six months. The contract was extended for nine times upto 30.01.2006. Even after the last extension granted, the work was completed.
(2.) The first respondent invoked the arbitration clause by raising seven claims. Claim No.3 was rejected. Claim Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 7 were awarded in part. Insofar as the claim Nos.4 to 6 awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the petitioners have duly complied with. Thus, we are concerned with claim Nos.1, 2 and 7. Claim No.1 is with respect to the claim made towards escalation price in completing the work. For this, a sum of Rs. 13,15,125/- was sought for. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 6,63,512/-. The Tribunal has passed the award by taking note of the admitted fact that there was an abnormal increase in the price of construction materials, labour and transport charges etc. The fact that the prices have been revised by the Kerala Public Works Department as well as the petitioners for the subsequent years also was taken note of. That the petitioners did not dispute this factum was also recorded. The agreement did not place any fetters on the right of the first respondent to make a claim for escalation for additional costs incurred was considered by the Tribunal. A factual finding has been rendered by the Tribunal that the delay in execution of the work occurred on the fault of the petitioners. The petitioners did not hand over the site within the time.
(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that Clause 17.2 of the General Conditions of Contract would prohibit such a claim. The first respondent itself has admitted the original rate. The first respondent did not make a claim in the monthly statement as per Clause 43(1) of the General Conditions of Contract. The quantum has been fixed without any basis and there is no clause provided for escalation,