BHAGWAN DASS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case. This revision is hereby allowed and while allowing the revision I rely upon AIR 1988 S.C. 1172, Union of India v. M/s. L.K. Ahuja and Co. and AIR 1997 Bombay 284, Ravindra Anant Deshmukh v. City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. and the judgment of this Court dated 20.1.2000 passed in Civil Revision No. 2489 of 1999 and hold that the matter should be referred to the arbitrator as per the arbitration clause.

(2.) I do not accept the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that in the judgments relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner, the final bills were prepared by the Department. It will not make a difference so long there is a controversy between the contractor and the department with regard to the correctness of the final bills. This is a dispute within the meaning and interpretation of the arbitration clause itself.

(3.) IN the view of this Court this clause creates a clog in the right of a contractor. The contractor has a right to say as to what amount is due to him from the Department. In the present case as stated above the Contractor has withdrawn the correctness of the earlier bills submitted by him and it is for the Arbitrator to adjudicate whether any claim is still due to the contractor or not.