- (1.) THE instant appeal has been preferred from the judgment and order dated 21st March, 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court on the application filed by the appellant herein under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. By the said application, appellant herein challenged the legality and validity of the award, dated August 30, 1990 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.
(2.) IT has been argued on behalf of the appellant that the learned Single judge has modified the award made by the learned Sole Arbitrator and virtually passed a new award in respect of the disputes between the parties. The learned Senior Counsel representing the appellant referred to the concluding portions of the judgment under appeal and submitted that the learned Single Judge had observed that the learned Arbitrator might have for a noble cause directed payment of costs to the Army central Welfare Fund, but the awarding of costs to a non-party is not permissible. The observations of the learned Single Judge are set out hereunder: "on the issue of cost, I feel that in an adversary proceeding cost awarded to non-party is not permissible. The Arbitrator for a noble cause directed cost to be paid to the Army Central Welfare Fund. However, I am of the view that this was not permitted in law and this is an error ex facie apparent on the face of the award. "
(3.) THE learned Single Judge modified the award of the learned Arbitrator to the extent that the claimant would be entitled to Rs. 2,25,437/- to be paid by the Railways. The learned Single Judge also deleted the cost awarded by the learned Arbitrator.;