A.Chakrabarti, J. - (1.) The appeal and the cross objection are against the judgment and order dated 28th June, 2002 passed by a learned single Judge allowing an application under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and thereby modifying the award only to the extent of award of costs and interest. As a dispute arose between the appellant and the respondent in respect of an agreement for execution of the work of "earth work in excavation and sand filling at the Mourigram Terminal of IOC", the matter was referred to arbitrator whereupon an arbitration proceeding was initiated which culminated in an award dated April 10. 2000. Application was filed under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 challenging the said award whereupon a learned single Judge of this Court considered the respective submissions of the parties and ultimately modified the award by allowing the application in respect of award of interest and costs.
(2.) Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, assisted by Mr. Shibdas Banerjee, learned counsels, appearing, for the appellant, first contended that section 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 does not give power to the Court to modify the award in the present facts and circumstances of the case and under sections 30 and 33 of the Act, the Court cannot substitute its decision in place of the decision of the learned counsel Arbitrator far less in case of non speaking award.
(3.) Next contention of the appellant is that question of grant of interest comes up as and by way of compensation for deprivation of a party in his enjoyment of money legally due to him. Power of the learned Arbitrator in this respect particularly in case of a non speaking award under the Act of 1940 has been argued relying upon the judgment in the case of Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissav. G.C. Roy reported in AIR 1992 SC 732 and State of Orissa v. B.N. Agarwalla etc. reported in AIR 1997 SC 925.;