JUDGEMENT
Navin Chawla, J. -
(1.)The only dispute left between the parties to be adjudicated is whether the Award dated 30.11.2012 passed by the Sole Arbitrator adjudicating the disputes that had arisen between the parties in relation to the Contract for supply of underground Railway Signalling Cable Size 19 Core x 1.5 sq. mm against the Purchase Orders dated 14.01.2009 and 24.02.2009, Awards pre-reference, pendent lite and post Award interest in favour of the petitioner or not.
(2.)The dispute between the parties was in relation to the claim of the petitioner for price variation for the supply made beyond March 2009. The respondent vide its reply filed to the present petition has placed on record the letter appointing the Arbitrator alongwith noting sheet of its office file approving such appointment. The noting sheet indicates that the respondent had calculated the effect of price variation claimed by the petitioner to be Rs. 1,08,30,830.40, however, was disputing the payabilty of the same as a matter of principle and contractual interpretation. In that light, while appointing the Arbitrator vide its letter dated 210.2010, the following term of reference was framed:
"While re-fixing the delivery period vide amendment letter No.08079516193002 dated 21.07.2009, Northern Railway had not allowed price variation beyond March 2009 considering the fact that the firm had procured the raw materials, and offered the material for inspection in March 2009."
(3.)The Arbitrator vide his Award dated 30.11.2012 passed the following direction:
"......... I therefore, decide on the basic issue
"While re-fixing the delivery period vide amendment letter no.08079516193002 dated 21 .07. 2009, Northern Railway had not allowed price variation beyond March, 2009 considering the fact that the firm had procured the raw materials and offered the material for inspection in 2009". The act of N.Rly. in not allowing the price variation beyond March' 2009 is not in accordance with the contract and therefore, contractually and legally not justified. As per the terms of references for this Arbitration, the Arbitrator is to decide the legality of the restriction imposed by N.Rly. on price variation beyond March' 2009. I therefore, conclude my judgement at this stage, leaving it further for N.Rly., COS's office to suitably settle the claim of the claimant which is found to be admissible in view of the foregoing judgement."
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.