BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. NARASINGHAL AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under S. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 3rd August, 2002 passed in Arbitration Misc. Case No. 188 of 2001 by the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar rejecting the application filed under Section 34 of the Act.

(2.) Pursuant to the tender call notice dated 2-12-1991 issued by the appellant for construction of Vertical Extension to the Telephone Exchange building at Koraput the respondent submitted his tender. The tender submitted by the respondent was accepted and an agreement was executed on 5-2-1992 between the parties. The agreement provides that the project should be completed within 15 (fifteen) months apart from other provisions for rescission of contract and adjudication of dispute by way of arbitration. The dispute in this case arose due to rescission of the contract by the appellant on 21-9-1994 and the same was referred to the sole Arbitrator Shri S. B. Lal, Chief Engineer (Arbitration) by the appellant for adjudication. The learned Arbitrator on consideration of the materials placed before him awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,95,918.00 with pendente lite interest at the rate of 15% per annum and further directed that if the award amount is not paid within ninety days from the date of publication of the award, interest would run at the rate of 18% per annum. Challenging the said award the appellant filed an application under S. 34 of the Act before the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar and the same having been rejected, this appeal has been preferred.

(3.) As it appears from the award the Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs. 85,000.00 in respect of cLalm Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7, Rs. 1,74,360.00 in respect of cLalm item No. 5, Rs. 83,603.00 in respect of cLalm item No. 6, Rs. 35,000.00 in respect of cLalm item No. 8, Rs. 9,330.00 in respect of cLalm item No. 11 and Rs. 9,625.00 in respect of cLalm item No. 14. On perusal of the application filed under S. 34 of the Act, it appears that the appellant challenged the award on the following grounds :