H.P.HOUSING BOARD Vs. RANJIT SINGH RANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common questions of law and identical facts ar2 involved in these two objection petitions, therefore, these are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The predecessor -in -int2rest of the objector and the claimant entered into an agreement No.S DA/CD -1/8/89 -90 regarding work of residential complex below BSC Shimla. Disputes arose between the parties out of the said contract, therefore, as per the contract; the matter was referred for arbitration. The arbitrator made his award dated 28.4.1999. The objector, successor -in -in -terest of the original party to the contract preferred objections under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as the Act) against the said award being OMP (M) No.25 of 1999.

(3.) The predecessor -in -interest of the objector and the claimant also entered into another agreement No.SDA (D -II) 9 of 1989 -90 regarding work of construction cf residential complex below BSC Shimla. The disputes having arisen between .he parties out of the said contract, as per the terms of the contract, were inferred for arbitration and the arbitrator made award dated 31.3.1999. The objector, successor - in -interest of the original party to the contract, preferred objections under Section 34(3) of the Act being OMP.(M) No.26 of 1999.