STATE OF ORISSA Vs. U N SAMANTRAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against an order under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act rejecting the objections raised by the present appellants against the award passed by the arbitrator in the matter of a dispute between the respondent- contractor and the State Government. By consent of parties before the Supreme Court, Justice A. Misra, a retired Judge of this Court was appointed as the arbitrator.

(2.) PLAINTIFF-respondent is a registered special class contractor under the State Government. He took up the work covered by F-2 Agreement for construction of up-stream and down-stream lock chamber at Munduli. His tender, being the lowest, was accepted by the State Government. Work order was issued to him and agreement was executed between the parties on 29-5-65 for execution of the work. Various disputes arose between the parties in course of execution of the work and also in respect of payments due to the plaintiff-respondent under the agreement. Ultimately, defendant No. 1 directed the plaintiff to take recourse to arbitration, as contemplated in the agreement. On 11-1-74, the plaintiff addressed a letter to defendant No. 2 asking for appointment of an arbitrator, as envisaged in the agreement. As there was no response, plaintiff made an application under Section 8 read with Section 20 of the Arbitration Act to court for appointment of an arbitrator. The said application was allowed by the court and Mr. Mumtaz Alli, a retired Chief Engineer, was appointed as the sole arbitrator. While the arbitration proceeding was pending before Mr. Alli, the defendants filed an application in court for revocation of the reference and for removal of Mr. Alli, This application for revocation of reference was allowed by the learned Subordinate Judge and the said order was also confirmed by this Court. The matter was thereafter carried to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 940 of 1976. The Supreme Court, on agreement, of both parties, appointed Justice A. Misra, a retired Judge of this Court, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes of the parties by order dated 23-8-76. In compliance with the order passed by the Supreme Court, reference was made to Justice A. Misra. After completion of the arbitration proceeding, he submitted the award on 20-12-77.

(3.) IN the instant case, the arbitrator has not appended any document, nor he has stated that he has based his decision on any particular point of law. Therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that the award suffers from any error of law or fact apparent on the face of record, so as to warrant interference by the court. The arbitrator has stated :-