ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. BABY SAMUEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners have challenged the Arbitration Award dated 15 th June, 2006 in this Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act).

(2.) The parties had entered into various contracts for various works connected with the setting up of a steel plant called Hot Strip Mill (HSM).

(3.) There were in all 2 contracts between the Petitioners and the Respondent s and 2 contract s between the Petitioners' sister concern one M/s Ispat Metallics Indust ries Ltd. (IMIL) and the Respondent s. Under the 2 contracts of the Petitioners certain additional works were required to be carried out as exigencies were created during the construction of the HSM. Those contracts were also given to the Respondent s under certain work orders / let ter s of intent. The Respondent s carried out those works also.