GUJARAT HOUSING BOARD Vs. VIPUL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is filed as per Sec. 12 of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 against an order passed by the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal on 17.10.1997. The Tribunal is constituted by the above said statute and revision against the award of Arbitration Tribunal as per sec. 12 of the said Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 is provided to the High court.

(2.) As per the brief facts of the case, the present petitioner - Housing Board awarded a contract to present respondent- Vipul Corporation for Water Proofing work of 360 Middle Income Group Houses at Valsad on 22.11.1994, being highest bidder, on accepting the tender. The work order of the said contract was issued to the contractor on 25.11.1994. As per the record, line out of the work was given to the contractor on 13.12.1994 at the site. It appears that at the last moment, when work was about to be started, the work was obstructed by the allottees of the said houses, and therefore, according to the petitioner, after visiting the site, the contractor was informed on 25.12.1994 not to start the work till further order. The work was to be completed within six months from the date of issuance of the work order, but since the contractor tendered security deposit late and that periiod of time was deducted from six months from the performance of the contract, and accordingly work was to be completed on 26.4.1995. After 25.12.1994 also the work could not be started and the contract could not be performed till 26.4.1995 and came to an end by efflux of time. Therefore, in these circumstances, the contractor filed Arbitration Reference No. 58/1996 before the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, at Ahmedabad and claimed Rs. 2,02,085/- by way of compensation.The present petitioner heavily contested the claim on the ground that the contract was not actually repudiated by the respondent - Housing Board, but the respondent Housing Board was sincerely trying to create an atmosphere which may enable the respondent- contractor to perform the contract, and according to the respondent, the reference to the Tribunal was pre-mature. It appears that the Housing Board also took the defence of frustration of the contract as per sec. 56 of the Contracts Act. Therefore, it was vehemently stated before the Tribunal that the members of the Housing Society bluntly refused to cooperate and did not allow the present respondent to carry out the work rendering the performance of the contract impossible. According to petitioner, therefore, the contract was void. The claim of the present respondent also denied by the present petitioner- Housing Board stating that no material as claimed by the present respondent in the Arbitration petition was brought on the site and on that count or any other count, the present respondent was not entitled to any compensation irrespective of the claims preferred on three heads by the present respondent through Arbitration Application. It was also contended further that line out was given on 13.12.1994, and a joint meeting of contractor, Housing Board and the Members of the Housing Association was held on 16.12.1994, but the persuasion of the allottees of the houses failed and the members i.e. allottees of the Houses remained adamant for not allowing to perform water proofing work by the contractor which was vehemently obstructed by them rendering the performance impossible.

(3.) After taking into consideration the documents produced on record, affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties, ld. Arbitration Tribunal came to the conclusion that present petitioner was liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs. 6,600/- towards misc. expenses and idle labour, Rs. 9,873/- towards the cost of materials and carting charges, Rs. 34,693/- towards loss of profit and present petitioner was liable to refund the security deposit of Rs. 8,326/-, totalling to Rs. 59,492/-. In the result, the Arbitration Tribunal passed an award against the present petitioner for an amount of Rs. 59,492/- along with the cost of Rs. 2200/- with running interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 14th September, 1995 till realization. This award of ld. Tribunal dated 17.10.1997 is impugned in this revision application.