DEWAN CHAND SABBARWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ANR.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Dewan Chand Sabbarwal
Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr.
Click here to view full judgement.
Kapur, J. -
(1.) THIS is an appeal from an order passed by Mr. Thakral, Subordinate Judge, First, Class, refusing to grant an interim injunction against the Union of India from continuing the work of construction of some of its flats.
(2.) THE applicant Diwan Chand Sabbarwal, made a tender for the construction of 200 Officers flats in New Delhi on 24 -2 -1948. This tender was accepted on 24 -2 -1948 and on 7th July the contract was signed by the Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle, C.P.W.D. On 21 -10 -1948, this contract was signed on behalf of the Governor -General by the Chief Engineer, C.P.W.D. Originally these Officers' flats were to be built on Cornwallis Road. Subsequently it was agreed that 112 flats should be constructed on Cornwallis Road and 88 on the Golf Link Road, New Delhi. It is alleged by Diwan Chand Sabbarwal that 112 quarters had been completed by January 1950 and 88 had been started and had partly been built. The estimate of the cost of the building which was originally Rs. 29,00,000 was increased to about Rs. 38,00,000. On 24 -2 -1950, notice was given to the contractor, Diwan Chand Sabbarwal, for the rescission of the contract on the ground that the contract had not been completed within the time specified. Action was really taken under Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the terms of contract. On 11 -2 -1950, Diwan Chand Sabharwal made an applicant. Under Section 20, Arbitration Act, for the enforcement of the arbitration clause contained in Clause 25 of the terms of contract. He also applied for the issue of a temporary injunction which was granted on 14 -2 -1960. On 18 -8 -1950, the matter was referred to the arbitration of the Superintending Engineer, Mr. N.G. Diwan. Before this arbitrator Diwan Chand, the contractor, filed his claim to which reply was given on behalf of the Union, and I am informed that 30 issues were framed before him.
(3.) AN award was to be filed by 18 -11 -1950, after two extensions had been given by the Court. Another extension had been asked for and the award has not yet been given. It may here be stated that the matter of temporary injunction which had been issued by the learned Subordinate Judge was also referred to the Arbitrator at the instance of both the parties who have signed their statements made in Court making this reference.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.