S.Narayan, J. - (1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated October 4, 1996 of a Single Judge of this court, by which an application under section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, to set aside an award dated June 10, 1995 was dismissed.
(2.) A dispute relating to the claim for rentals of equipments and for supply of chemicals arising out of a contract between the parties was referred to the joint Arbitrators, Mr. Alok Chandra Gupta (nominated by ONGC) and Mr. R.P. Bhatt (nominated by Dowell) both retired judges of High Court. At the close of the reference proceeding, there was an Award in favour of the claimant (Dowell) directing the appellant (ONGC) to pay the following amounts with interest @ 7.5 per cent per annum from 1st April, 1994 till the date of payment as also a sum of Rs. 25,000 as costs of arbitration :- (1) Claim for rentals of equipment (payable is US$) (2) Claim for difference in exchange rate an the invoice for supply of chemicals (payable in Rupees at the DD buying exchange rate on the date of payment. US$ 345,449.39 US$ 16,345.27
(3.) The Award was challenged on the grounds with regard to the authority of the joint Arbitrators in construing the terms of the contract and also there being errors of facts and in law said to be apparent on the body of the Award. A question was, therefore, raised as to the extent of interference by a court of law with regard to the contentions raised as such. A long catena of authoritative decisions with regard to propositions of law was cited on the either side before the Single Bench where the appellant did not, however, find favour to accept its contention and, accordingly, the matter has been brought before this Bench. It may be added here that in the event of there being no default in conducting the proceeding of an arbitration as being an admitted case here there usually arises only the question as to how the terms of the contract have been interpreted by the arbitrators and if such interpretation has resulted into some apparent errors in the Award with regard to the facts. Any interference by a court of a law was however restrictive as provided under section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. It was only the extent of restriction that has thus been always in anxiety for a court of law so as to determine the same in the given facts of a particular case and to sub-serve the cause of justice.;