S. Banerjee, J. - (1.) An award made under the Arbitration Act, 1940 in the year 1991 has been challenged under Ss. 30 and 33 of the Act.
(2.) The arbitration Clause did not oblige the Arbitrator to give reasons in support of his award. The petitioner says that notwithstanding the Arbitrator not being required to furnish reasons, the Arbitrator has, in fact, passed a reasoned award and the petitioner is entitled to question the reasons.
(3.) Over the first two pages of the award, the Arbitrator has narrated the facts and at the third page the Arbitrator has recorded the following before specifying the amounts awarded under various heads: According to the respondent's counter statement, it intended to terminate the contract on the ground of default/neglect/failure of the claimant. However, the respondent as it appears stated hiring truck/lorries from third parties since January 1988 and completely stopped giving any transportation job to the claimant from February 1988. The respondent eventually terminated the contract by its letter dated 18th June 1988 preceded by an explanatory letter dated 5th May, 1988 on the ground that the respondent had established a Feeder warehouse at Patna in January 1988 and stocks were being received directly from Baroda instead of redirecting the same from Calcutta. There is thus a clear inconsistency on respondent's part who in fact terminate(d) the contract of the claimant in February, 1988 itself on alleged ground of default but merely attempted to core (sic, cover up) the irregularity by a plead (sic, plea) calculated to give such termination a prospective and immediate effect. In view of the foregoing, I hereby award and direct as follows:;