STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. TARUN MAHINDRU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent was awarded work, of, "construction of Degree College Darang at Narala, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi". However, a dispute arose inter se the respondent, and, the petitioner, and, withthe emerging dispute, inter se, the, contesting litigants, being arbitrable, thereupon, Shri Jatinder S Bhogal, Senior Advocate, was appointed, as, the sole Arbitrator, for, his making an award, vis-a-vis, the respective claims, of, the respondent, and, of, the petitioners herein. The award rendered by the learned Sole Arbitrator, becomes hence challenged, before this Court, at the instance, of, the State of Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Before proceeding to validate or invalidate the challenged award hence before this Court, and, as made by the learned Sole Arbitrator, it is incumbent, upon, this Court to bear in mind, the limits within whose domain(s), hence, valid interference(s) can be made, vis-a-vis, the award rendered, by, the learned Sole Arbitrator. The limits, of, challenge, vis-a-vis, a arbitration award, are, encapsulated, in, a judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in, a case titled, as, Associate Builders vs. Delhi Development Authority, 2015 3 SCC 49, limits whereof stands extracted hereinafter:-

(3.) Apparently, the award impugned, before this Court, neither shocks the conscience of this Court nor is against public morality, thereupon, the relief granted by the Sole Arbitrator, vis-a-vis, the respondent herein, and, under the head "Office/Site overheads, and, sparked, from, the, pleaded, and, evident apposite prolongation(s), and, comprised in a sum of Rs.3,90,725/-,is, sustained, (a) as, the learned Sole Arbitrator, has assigned valid reason(s), vis-a-vis, the respondent becoming precluded to initiate, and, to completely execute the awarded works, (b) given the drawings remaining unsupplied to him, for an inordinately prolonged duration of time, rather by the petitioner herein, upon, whom it was incumbent, to, purvey the drawings, for, the relevant purposes, hence, to the respondent herein. Consequently, the amount, under the afore head, as, awarded, vis-a-vis, the respondent herein, rather by the learned Sole Arbitrator, does not warrant, any interference, from, this Court. Likewise, under an head alike therewith, and, besides, a, para meteria thereto, hence, head, and, appertaining, to, price escalation, the awarding(s), of, money(s) qua therewith, vis-a-vis, the respondent, is, also valid.