(1.) THE appellant is a Railway contractor. He entered into a contract with the South Eastern Railway for the performance of various works in connection with the Bhilai Marshalling Yard. Disputes having arisen on certain claims preferred by the appellant against the Railway Administration, they were referred to the arbitration of Shri S. K. Mitra, Deputy Chief Accounts Officer and Shri R. P. Basu Choudhury, Engineer -incharge (Bridge). Relevant extract from the letter of reference addressed from the Office of the General Manager, may usefully be reproduced here :
(2.) THE General Manager has accordingly nominated and appointed you as Arbitrators in the above matter. You are, therefore, requested to enter into reference and pronounce your decision and publish your Award on the items of Claims/disputes as specified below. You are also requested before entering into reference, to nominate an Umpire to whom the case will be referred in the event of any difference between yourselves (i. e. the two Arbitrators) : items of claims : Items of claims :
(3.) THE appellant's first contention before us is that the reference specifically required the arbitrators to give their award on each item of claim separately. The arbitrators. instead of pronouncing their decision on each item, gave a consolidated award, which was in fact and law a neglect of duty and shirking of responsibility, amounting to legal misconduct. (Reliance is placed on Union of India v. Firm J. P. Sharma and Sons, AIR 1968 Raj 99).