CHAHAL AND COMPANY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short 'the Act') have been preferred against the award dated 26-9-1997 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Hoshangabad in Civil Suit No. 11-B/86. The contractor has filed a separate appeal (M. A. No. 1489/97) against that part of the award by which the Court had declined and did not pass any order regarding the interest. The State of Madhya Pradesh has filed appeal (M. A. No. 4/98) against that part of the award by which the Court below had made rule of Court of the award passed by the arbitrator. Since the aforesaid two appeals have arisen from a common order passed by the Court below, they are being decided by this common order.

(2.) A civil suit was filed by the contractor for the realization of non-payment of the amount due to him in the Court below and in that suit application by contractor, who was plaintiff, was submitted to refer the matter for redressal, to the arbitrator. That application was allowed and the matter was referred to the arbitrator. The Court below vide its order dated 20-7-1990 appointed Shri S. P. Caprihan, Retired Engineer-in-Chief as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the dispute and differences arising out of the agreement between the contractor and the State.

(3.) THE admitted fact is that the parties entered into an agreement and thereby the work order was given to the contractor for the construction of Right Bank Canal Tunnel including approach channel and intake structure. Since some amount was due to the contractor and was not paid by the State Government to him, he filed the suit in which, on the application of the contractor, the matter was referred to the above said sole arbitrator.