VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE common questions of fact and law arise, the two cases are disposed of by a common Judgment. The Court below also disposed them by a common order.

(2.) C.R.P. No. 3146/82 arises against the order in O.P. No. 169/80 laid by the petitioner contractor under Sections 14, 16 and 17 of the ARBITRATION ACT, 1940 (10 of 1940), for short, "the Act", to make the award, dated July 4, 1980, rule of the Court and to pass a decree in terms thereof. C.M.A. 831/82 arises against O.P. 168/80 at the instance of the respondents to set aside the award, under Sections 15, 16 and 30 of the Act. The Court below modified the award to the extent of the interest of Rs. 4,868/- payable from April 1, 1970 till May 31, 1980 and principal sum i.e,, Rs. 6,437/- was confirmed. Thus the revision by the petitioner and the appeal of the State.

(3.) SRI Sivarama Sastry, learned counsel for the petitioner-contractor contends that the additional works executed are integral part of the contract and the petitioner had completed and handed over the work to the respon- dents on March 31, 1970, but the respondents have unlawfully withheld payment of the money due to him. Had his claims been settled and the petitioner had been paid, he would have fruitfully made use of the money, but they have unlawfully denied benefit thereof; thereby the petitioner is entitled to interest from April, 1, 1970 till May 31, 1980. Therefore, the grant of interest in the award is perfectly legal. In support thereof, he placed strong reliance on State of M.P. vs. S. & S. Ltd.' The only question is whether the petitioner is entitled to interest ? If so, from what date ?