Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. - (1.) Leave granted. 1. The appellant was awarded a contract by the respondent of earth excavation work and loading into trucks and unloading for purposes of widening of the approach road Sukhna Choe on Chandigarh 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 arbitration and despite the appellant invoking the arbitration clause, the Superintendent Engineer failed to nominate an Arbitrator resulting in the appellant approaching the Court. In the course of the said proceedings Mr. R.N. Singal, retired District & Sessions Judge was appointed as an arbitrator in terms of order dated 31.7.2002 of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chandigarh.
(3.) The parties put forth their respective claims before the arbitrator. The appellant laid the claims while the respondent filed the counterclaims. The arbitrator made and published an Award dated 18.12.2013, partly allowing the claim of the appellant while rejecting the counterclaims of the respondent. The claims laid and the extent awarded as well as the counterclaims laid are as under: JUDGEMENT_94_LAWS(SC)12_2017_1.html JUDGEMENT_94_LAWS(SC)12_2017_2.html S. No. 1. Particulars Balance payment accruing from the last running bill Amount (in INR) 2,00,014 Particulars Claim No.1 and amount deposited by way of earnest Amount (in INR) 1,20,299 32,000 Interest @ 12% per annum was also allowed by the arbitrator in favour of the appellant. JUDGEMENT_94_LAWS(SC)12_2017_3.html Counterclaims made by the Respondent ;