NAPC LIMITED Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O.P.No.881 of 2018 has been filed by the Claimant to set aside the award passed in respect of Claim-B nd O.P.No.899 of 2018 has been filed by the Respondent against rejection of entire claim. Since both the Original Petitions are arising out of the same Award, this Court is inclined to dispose of the same in a common order.

(2.) 2(A) The respondent invited bids for executing the road work of Construction of Two Lane Road including construction of Major Bridge at KM2/10-3/4. In response to the notice, the Claimant submitted its offer for Rs.46,82,59,435.89 on 29.10.2009. The Respondent vide its letter Ex.C-3 informed the claimant that the claimant has not given the consent letter reducing the quoted rates in the tender dated29.10.2009 as assured during the negotiation held on 09.12.2009. In response to that letter the claimant offered a rebate of 13.5% on each and every item quoted value of Rs.46,82,59,435.89, duly indicating that the claimant is not in a position to reduce their rates further due to following reasons:

(3.) The subject matter of the arbitration is with regard to the claim made in respect of extended period of contract. Total amount of claim is Rs.10,85,72,753/- in which Arbitrator awarded Rs.2,98,14,000/- and in respect of claim-B the Arbitrator rejected the claim. However, interest of Rs.1,14,09,000/- and cost of Rs.9,35,000/- have been awarded. In total, the claim is allowed for a sum of Rs.4,21,58,000/-. The above award was challenged mainly on the ground that the Award is violative of public policy and the arbitration clause was invoked beyond the period of statutory period of limitation and also contractual limitation period.