UNITED PLANTATION LIMITED Vs. K.VASU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of O.S. Rules r/w. Section 37(1)(B) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act' for brevity) is directed against the order in O.P.No.141 of 2017 dated 13.07.2018.

(2.) The appellant filed the said Petition in O.P.No.141 of 2017 under Section 34(2) of the Act to set aside the additional award dated 29.09.2016 passed by the Sole Arbitrator (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"?). The said petition was dismissed by the impugned order.

(3.) The appellant appointed the respondent as a Contractor for felling trees at Terrace Tea Estate in the Nilgiris District covering an extent of 450 acres. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)dated 14.02.2013 was entered into, under which the respondent was entitled to cut Blue gum and Wattle trees at a total cost of Rs.45,00,000/- excluding trees in 8 hectares from and out of the total extent of 450 acres. The respondent paid the entire consideration in terms of the MOA and the appellant agreed to cooperate with the respondent for the purpose of obtaining required statutory approvals. The MOA stated that the respondent should remove the trees on or before 13.05.2014. The Forest Department granted permission vide order dated 30.05.2013 to cut trees in 5 hectares at the first stage, to be cut within four months. The appellant was required to identify the areas and the trees to be cut within one week in advance. The respondent cut and removed the trees in 5 hectares and the forest authorities have identified and inspected the progress of work and removal of trees so as to prevent any illegal felling. The appellant approached the District Collector seeking permission for cutting and removing trees in another extent of 5 hectares vide application dated 17.07.2013. At that juncture, their appears to have arisen a dispute resulting in a complaint lodged by the appellant against the respondent to the Forest authorities vide complaint dated 16.07.2013 alleging that the respondent had illegally cut trees in unauthorized areas and in areas not permitted by the appellant. This lead to the dispute between the parties.