R.DAYAL, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19-4-1994 passed by the Ist Addl. Civil Judge, Bulandshahr making award of the arbibtrator a rule of Court in Suit No. 156 of 1994.
(2.) In pursuance of a contract bearing number K-02-036 dated 9-4-1990 between the patties, the respondent-contractor did some construction work for the appellant. The respondent raised a claim for the expenditure incurred by it on dewatering inrespect of items 16 and 17 of the agreement by means of a letter dated 16-6-1992 addressed to Superintending Engineer, Upper Ganga Canal Modernisation, II Division World Bank, for which the respondent did not receive any reply. Thereupon, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Chief Engineer and the same was rejected vide his communication dated 1-2-1993. Then the respondent made a request for referring the matter to arbitrator. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the arbitration of Sri Amar Singh Rajpoot, Superintendent Engineer. The case of contractor is that dewatering was an extra work under items 16 and 17 and on this count he has incurred heavy expenditure for which the appellant is liable to pay. On the other hand, the case of the appellant is that nothing was to be paid on this count, as per the terms of the agreement.
(3.) Items 16 and 17 read as under :-"16. Supplying and laying boulder in approach and sides including cost of all labour, material, lead and lifts, lead dewatering etc.600 M3CumRs. 253.00 (Rs. Two hundered.fifty three only.)17 Sheet pile driving with all labour, T and P, equipment, lead and lifts including cost of sheet piles including dewatering etc.25MTMetric TonneRs. 10,900.00 (Rs. Ten thousand Nine hundered only).;