MRITAK CHARAM SODHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY LTD Vs. MUNICIPAL COPORATION OF DELHI
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
MRITAK CHARAM SODHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY LTD.
MUNICIPAL COPORATION OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
Veena Birbal, J. -
(1.) The present appeal is under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act read with order XLIII CPC against impugned order dated 16.01.2006 passed by learned Single Judge in the Arbitration case whereby the arbitration award dated 11.07.1996 has been made rule of the Court and decree has been ordered to be drawn up accordingly.
(2.) Briefly the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are as under: The appellant was awarded contract of removal of carcasses from the city by the respondent/MCD through intervention of the Court for which the highest bid of the appellant was of Rs.34 lacs. The contract was for one year duration i.e. from 01.04.1993 to 31.03.1994. Some disputes arose about the payment which were allegedly to be made by the appellant to the MCD. The appellant did not make the payment and accordingly respondent/MCD invoked arbitration clause 14 in the agreement and appointed Mr. S.M. Husnain, the then Chief Engineer as arbitrator vide order dated 02.06.1994. After retirement of Shri Husnain, on attaining the age of superannuation, he resigned as the arbitrator vide his letter dated 18.07.1995 and in his place Mr. C.M. Vij, Chief Engineer was appointed as the sole arbitrator. The Chief Engineer entered upon the reference vide letter dated 02.01.1996 and concluded the arbitration proceedings on 22.05.1996 requiring the parties to file authorities with reference to submission made by them and gave them fifteen days' time. No authorities were filed by the parties. After considering the claims and hearing the parties, the arbitrator directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.5,72,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from 13.06.1994 upto the date of payment to respondent/MCD. He also directed the respondent/MCD to refund security deposit to the appellant after making admissible recoveries, if any, as per terms and conditions of agreement dated 18.01.1994. The award was filed before the Court and was registered as CS(OS) No.348-A/1997. Notice of award was issued to both the parties. The appellant filed objections against the award dated 11.07.1006. The main objection raised before the learned Single Judge was that the appellant was not allowed to lift carcasses for the complete period of contract as such appellant was required to pay balance amount as is directed by the arbitrator. Learned counsel for appellant further raised the objection that the award was non-speaking one and that the appointment of arbitrator was illegal and the matter was to be referred to Registrar of Societies. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record learned Single Judge dismissed the Objections. Consequently award was made rule of the court and decree was ordered to be drawn up and suit was disposed off accordingly. Aggrieved with the aforesaid order/judgment dated 16.01.2006 of learned Single Judge present appeal is filed.
(3.) We have heard Shri A.S. Gambhir, learned counsel for appellant and Shri Anoop Bagai, learned counsel for respondent and perused the record.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.