STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. JAGDISH CHAND GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE objections have been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Act ') against the award dated 6.9.1999 passed by the Arbitrator in agreement No. 12 of 1989 -90 for the construction of bridge over river Beas at Chamba Pattan on Jawalamukhi -Chamba Pattan road.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that the parties entered into lumpsum contract No. 12 of 1989 -90 on 29.5.1989 for construction of bridge over river Beas at Chamba Pattan on Jawalamukhi Chamba Pattan road for Rs. 1,98,50,000/ -. The Respondent as per award letter was to commence the work from the 10th day of the award letter and the work was to be completed within two years from the said date. The date of completion of the work was 8.6.1991, however, the Respondent did not complete the work, but in between, requested to refer the matter to Arbitrator for decision of disputes raised by him.

(3.) IT has been alleged that the Respondent did not complete the work within two years as per stipulation in the contract agreement. In fact, the work remained incomplete and, therefore, Engineer Incharge under Clause 64 had rightly imposed 5% compensation amounting to Rs. 9.925 lacs on Respondent. This was confirmed by the Superintending Engineer whose decision was agreed to be final by the parties. Therefore, against levy of compensation imposed by the Engineer 16/5/2014 Page 9 Devyani Food Industries Private Ltd. Versus State Of H.P. Incharge under Clause 64 of the contract agreement, no reference for arbitration could be made. The Arbitrator wrongly reduced such compensation to 'Nil ', which is contrary to Section 34 of the Act.