PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION CO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although these petitions are separate yet identical points arise for consideration therein, and, therefore, it would be convenient to dispose of both these petitions by this common order. Both these petitions are filed under Sec. 30 of the Indian Arbitration Act for setting aside the Award under Sec. 17 of the Arbitration Act made by the arbitrators. Arbitration Petition No.163 of 1995 is filed by M/s. Progressive Construction Co. against Union of India while the other petition is filed by the Union of India against Shri Suresh Jain. It would be necessary to note the facts in brief in order to appreciate the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners in each of the petitions.

(2.) In Arbitration Petition No.163 of 1995, the petitioners are a registered partnership firm carrying on business as civil engineers and constructor having their office at Vashi, New Bombay. The Petitioners and the respondents through the Chief Engineer (Construction), Metropolitan Transport Project (Railways), entered into a contract on 6/6/1989 for the work of construction of road over bridge at Ch.13164 near Nerul on Bombay-Belapur Road. In connection with this work certain disputes and differences arose between the parties. The General Conditions of contract were incorporated in the contract agreement and the contract agreement provides reference of all the disputes to the joint arbitration. There is a correction slip no.15 to the General Conditions of Contract issued by the respondents' Board by letter dtd. 21/12/1983 and the said corrections slip no.15 incorporates the changes as follows :

(3.) In Arbitration Petition No.263 of 1995 a contract agreement dtd. 6/5/1987 was executed by and between the parties and the respondents were to carry out the construction of staff quarters Type-I 32 Units, Type-II 6 Units, Type-III 2 Units, Type IV-1 Unit at Gulbarga. The disputes in regard to this work arose between the parties and as per the terms of contract agreement those were referable to joint arbitration. Accordingly, the disputes were referred to joint arbitration of M.K.Chowksey, Joint Arbitrator, Professor (Works) Iricen, Pune, Central Railway and B.B.Verma Joint Arbitrator DY.CAO (G) Central Railway, Bombay. In all 16 claim items were preferred before the Joint Arbitrators by the respondents and the Arbitrators by their Award allowed only item nos. 2, 3, 9, 13, 14 and 15 totalling to Rs.4,81,275/- as against Rs.11.53,146/- claimed by the respondents. This Award came to be filed in this Court and after service of notice thereof the Union of India has filed the present petition for setting aside the Award under Sec. 30 of the Indian Arbitration Act.