STATE OF U P Vs. RAM NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court making the award rule of the Court.

(2.) The case arises out of arbitration proceedings. The plaintiff - respondent claimed Rs. 1,01,49,152 50 paise by way of additional claim for the work done by him. The matter was referred to arbitrator, who awarded Rs. 90,21,75.65 plus 9 per cent per annum from 21st May, 1990 and further interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the principal sum from the date of this award till the payment or till the decree and further a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards costs. Reference of arbitration was made under clause 14.1.3 of the contract entered into on 26th August, 1985, which was for the construction of Maudaha Dam Project Spillway etc. The dispute relates to the claim of the plaintiff - respondent for revised rate for the additional work done by him pertaining to Item Nos. 13 and 15 of the Schedule of bids to the contract documents.

(3.) Brief facts are : the appellant invited tenders for the construction of non - overflow and overflow sections with bridge of spillway and other appurtenant work of Maudaha Dam in Hamirpur District in the year 1983. The plaintiff - claimant submitted their tender on 10th November, 1983 and after negotiations the revised offer reducing the rate was made by him. Thereafter, a letter of indent was issued to the claimant by the appellant on 12th Feburary, 1985, which resulted into the aforesaid contract dated 26th August, 1985. The date of commencement of work was 1st September, 1985, for a period of 42 months, ending on 28th February, 1989. The claimant commenced the work as per the contract. Thereafter, in the year 1987 fresh drawing Nos. 22 and 23 were given by the appellant in respect of Item Nos. 13 and 15 of the Schedule of bids, which abnormally increased the work, to 170 percent for Item No. 13 and 190 per cent for Item No. 15. The plaintiff continued to work under the direction of the concerned Engineer on an assurance that the rate would be increased. The stipulated quantity of work for Item No. 13 was 57000 cubic meters while the claimant completed 66122 cubic meters till 28th February, 1989, the completion date envisaged in the contract. Similarly, for Item No. 15 the stipulated quantity of work was 3500 cubic meters, the claimant executed 4305 cubic meters till 28th February, 1989. On these facts the claimant sought revision of rates as per the rate analysis given by them in the letter dated 24th August, 1989. The said letter of the claimant was for revising the rate in respect of the quantities of work increased beyond 10 percent. However, this was rejected by the appellant through letter dated 16th September, 1989. In view of clauses 2.11.1, 4.5.2 and 11.25.0 of the contract. Claimant while acknowledging the rejection letter sought for invoking arbitration clause with a request that the claim for payment of additional quantities at revised rate be referred to the Arbitrator. The revised rate claimed by the claimant is at the rate of Rs. 453.50 per cubic meter for Item No. 13 in place of Rs. 243.00 and Rs. 739.55 per cubic meter for Item No. 15 in place of Rs. 460.00 given in the contract.