TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1856
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....digarh Kalka Road, Chandigarh vide memo No. 201 dated 5.1.1996. The earth was required to be lifted from the first source near the regulator and carried through trucks from Golf side initially. There was a second source of lifting the earth as per permission of the Superintendent Engineer but it is not necessary to go into the details of the contract for the present purposes. Suffice to say that the Respondent alleges that the Appellant did not fulfil its obligations while the Appellant, on the other hand, alleges that what was required to be done by the Respondent to facilitate execution of the contract was not so done. This resulted in the Respondent terminating the contract on 12.11.1996. 2. The conditions of the contract provided for a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-- -- 6. Payment on account of loss of profit on balance work 90,835 -- -- 7. Loss due to prolongation of work 12,80,000 -- -- 8. Litigation Expenses 25,000 -- -- Total 50,93,966 Total 10,37,185 Interest @ 12% per annum was also allowed by the arbitrator in favour of the Appellant. Counterclaims made by the Respondent 1. Liquidated damages and the expenses incurred by it for completion of work 8,01,808 2. Loss due to delay in completion of work 20,00,000 Total 28,01,808 4. The Respondent aggrieved by the Award filed objections Under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'), which were, however, rejected by the learned Additional ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the aforesaid allegations but on the other hand contended that the work was carried on by the Appellant at slow pace leaving the Respondent-Department with no alternative but to levy penalty and to finally terminate the contract vide letter dated 12.11.1996. 7. In the opinion of the arbitrator the performance of the contractual obligations by the Appellant were dependent on reciprocal performances by the Respondent. On appreciation of evidence on record it was concluded that the Respondent had failed to comply with its obligations and, thus, held the contract to be illegally terminated. Thereafter the arbitrator, once again, on appreciation of evidence decided to award the amounts as specified aforesaid. 8. The learned Additional Distri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r unloading of the earth but only charges up to 5 kilometres were to be paid. Thus, the finding is that the arbitrator mis-conducted himself by acting contrary to the terms of the contract. 10. We are not in agreement with the approach adopted by the learned single Judge. The dispute in question had resulted in a reasoned award. It is not as if the arbitrator has not appreciated the evidence. The arbitrator has taken a plausible view and, an in our view, as per us the correct view, that the very nature of job to be performed would imply that there has to be an area for unloading and that too in the vicinity of 5 kilometres as that is all that the Appellant was to be paid for. The route was also determined. In such a situation to say that t....