Prabir Kumar Majumdar, J. - (1.) THIS is an application by State of West Bengal under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act for setting aside the award, dated 18th March, 1988 made and published by the sole arbitrator Mr. Anil Kumar Mitra. THIS is an arbitration without the intervention of the Court and the arbitrator is a retired Chief Engineer of Irrigation and Waterways Department of the Government of West Bengal. 1. In response to a notice inviting tender the respondent No. 1 M/s. India Construction Company, the claimant before the arbitrator, submitted tender at the rate of 2.97% above the petitioner's schedule of rates for an aggregate sum of Rs. 2,49,97,466. A similar rate had also been quoted by another tenderer M/s. B. C. Agarwala and Co., and the total work was divided between the said two tenderers the respondent No. 1 herein and M/s. B. C. Agarwala and Co. into 50:50. The work Order was issued by the Executive Engineer Teesta Barrage, Division No. I on 10th December, 1980 and later on a formal contract was entered into in a printed form No. 2911(ii) of the State of West Bengal. According to the petitioner, the contractor delayed the execution of the work and upon the extension granted from time to time by the department the contractor ultimately completed the work in November, 1983. By letter, dated 25th September, 1984 the Contractor submitted a supplementary claim of Rs. 16,01,274.30p before the Superintending Engineer in connection with the work.
(2.) THEREAFTER, the contractor, that is, the respondent No. 1 herein raised a dispute by a letter, dated 16th November, 1985 before the Chief Engineer Irrigation and Waterways Department; Government of West Bengal claiming a sum of Rs. 53,79,422.30p and prayed for referring the same to the arbitration and thereafter the Chief Engineer, Irrigation and Waterways Department, Government of West Bengal appointed one Anil Kumar Mitra, the retired Chief Engineer as the sole arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes. According to the petitioner before the arbitrator, claimant submitted statement of claim, claiming a sum of Rs. 79,89,973.30p and the main contention of the respondent No. 1 was that the State, the petitioner in this application was responsible for delay in the execution of the work. During the continuance of the arbitration proceeding the respondent No. 1 filed an application for interim award of Rs. 16,01,274.30p under Section 27 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the petitioner filed objection to the said application for interim award. It is the contention of the petitioner that the learned arbitrator heard the matter on several dates and set aside the said claim. on 18th June, 1987. It is the allegation of the petitioner that the learned arbitrator committed misconduct by not deducting: the said amount from total claim as claimed by the respondent No. 1 by way of an interim award.
(3.) IT is also the contention of the petition that the learned the arbitrator after hearing the submission of the parties in about 28 sittings made and published his award on 18th March, 1988 for a sum of Rs. 46,70,60D plus interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount with effect from the completion of the 90 days of declaration of the said award till the date of payment or decree whichever is earlier.;