Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. - (1.) : This appeal has been filed by Union of India which is represented by Executive Engineer, Postal Civil Division - II, challenging a judgment and order dated 6th May, 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. By the said judgment the learned Single Judge dismissed the application, filed by the appellant, for setting aside an award.
(2.) The relevant facts of the case are that the respondent is a Class-I Contractor, engaged in various constructional work and pursuant to a tender process floated by the appellant the respondents submitted its offer for execution of a construction work comprising of office building for Postmaster General, West Bengal Circle, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata. Ultimately the respondent was entrusted with the work. A formal agreement was executed between the parties. In the course of execution of work some disputes and differences arose between the parties calling and they were referred to arbitration. The said contract contained an Arbitration Clause which is Clause 25. The said Clause is as follows : "Clause 25. Settlement of disputes by Arbitration.-Except where otherwise provided in the contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right matter or thing whatsoever, in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works, or the execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work or after the completion or abandonment thereof shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the person appointed by the Chief Engineer, P & T Civil Wing, in charge of the work at the time of dispute or if there be no Chief Engineer the administrative head of the said P & T Civil Wing at the time of such appointment. It will be no objection to any such appointment that the arbitrator so appointed is a Government servant, that he had to deal with the matters to which the contract relates and that in the course of his duties as Government servant he had expressed views on all or any of the matters in dispute or difference. The arbitration to whom the matter is originally referred being transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act for any reason, such Chief Engineer or administrative head as aforesaid at the time of such transfer, vacation of office or inability to act, shall appoint another person to act as arbitrator in accordance with the terms of the contract. Such person shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the state at which it was left by his predecessor. It is also a term of this contract that no person other than a person appointed by such Chief Engineer or administrative head of the P & & T Civil Wing as aforesaid should act as arbitrator and if for any reason, that is not possible, the matter is not to be referred to arbitration at all. In all cases where the amount of the claim dispute is Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) or above, the arbitrator shall give reasons of the award. Subject as aforesaid the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof and the rules made thereunder and for the time being in force shall apply to the arbitration proceeding under the clause. It is also a term of the contract that the party invoking arbitration shall specify the dispute or disputes to be referred to arbitration under this clause together with the amount or amount claimed in respect of each such dispute. It is also a term of the contract that if the contractor(s) do/does not make any demand for arbitration in respect of any claim(s) in writing within 90 days of receiving the initiation from the Government that the bill is ready for payment, the claim of the contractor(s) will be deemed to have been waived and absolutely barred and the Government shall be discharged and released of all liabilities under the contract in respect of these claims. The arbitrator(s) may from time to time with consent of the parties enlarge the time, for making and publishing the award."
(3.) In view of various disputes between the parties the matter was referred to the arbitration of the named arbitrator, Mr. Surendranath. Before the named arbitrator claims and counter-claims were filed. After a hearing before the arbitrator an award was passed by the named arbitrator on 29th January, 1990. From the said award it appears that the arbitrator gave an award to the extent that the appellant is to pay the respondents a sum of Rs.14, 37, 859/- and there was no direction in the award about payment of interest.;