A.Chakraborti, J. - (1.) This appeal was filed by the Union of India & Ors. challenging the Judgment and Order dated September 29, 2000, passed by the learned District Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair, in Misc, Judicial Case No. 12 of 2000 whereby an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the Union of India challenging the Award in respect of claim Nos, 1, 3 and 4, was dismissed.
(2.) Mr. P. K. Roy, learned counsel for the appellants, mainly challenged the findings of the learned Arbitrator in Claim No. 1 and the impugned Judgment relating to the same. Over and above the aforesaid, contention has also been made with regard to the Award relating to the interest allowed and the specific contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the award relating to interest requires clarification as neither the date from which interest is payable can be ascertained from the said Award nor the rate has been assessed properly. At this stage, Mr. Hirak Mitra, learned counsel for the respondent, states on instruction that the respondent is agreeable if the same is clarified, even to the extent that the interest is payable from the date of reference. To this proposition, learned counsel for the appellant also agreed as date of reference is subsequent to the date from which interest is payable according to the contention of the appellant. With regard to the rate of interest, I do not find any ground for interference either with the Award or with the impugned Judgment relating to the same and therefore the impugned Award dated March 22, 1999 relating to the claim for interest as relates to claim No. 4 is required to be clarified to this extent that interest is payable at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of reference of the dispute for arbitration, that is, April, 20, 1998 to the date the amount is actually paid to the claimant.
(3.) With regard to Claim No. 1, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the same was framed as follows :- "Claim Item No. 1. That as per the measurements recorded by the Respondent upto 16th Running Account Bill, the total excavated quantity is 13.470 Lac Cubm. Out of this total quantity, the rock quantity is 12.650 Lac Cubm. As per the agreement, the rock quantity assumed as ordinary rock is only 1.470 Lac Cubm. Considering deviation limit factor, payment for the deviated quantity, exceeding the 25% deviation on 1.470 Lac Cubm is 10.8125 Lac Cubm. Payment at the rate of Rs. 231 for the deviated quantity actually due to the Claimant is Rs. 24975 lacs. But due to force payment made by the Respondent upto 16th RA Bill on the plea of application of void factor, the quantity of Ordinary rock is 5.884 Lac Cubm. Considering the deviation limit of 25% and the original agreemental quantity of ordinary rock as 1.470 lac Cubm. the deviated quantity payable at the revised rate is 4.0505 Lac Cubm. Since this is the arbitration during currency period of the Contract, the Claimant claims payment for the deviated quantity of 4.0505 Lac Cubm @ Rs. 231/M3 amounting to Rs. 935.6655 Lacs. Since the Respondent has force paid a sum of Rs. 217.6985 Lacs upto 16th RA Bill against ordinary rock, the claimant is entitled to balance payment of Rs. 717.9697 Lacs or Rs. 7.18 Lacs from the Respondent.";