A.N. Jindal, J. - (1.) THE sole question which has arisen for determination in this case is, "whether it was obligatory on the part of the arbitrator to elaborate the reasons while passing the award - The case relates to the award dated 21.12.1998 passed under The Arbitration Act, 1940, which was made rule of the court by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Patiala on 23.8.2008 and the appeal preferred by it was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala, on 27.3.2012. The petitioner company vide agreement dated 24.6.1987 had placed the work on the respondent for supply of T.G. Sets and allied equipments, its installation, erection and commissioning with associated civil works for Rohti (2x400 KW TG sets with 10% continuous overload capacity) and Dhariwal (4x750 KW TG sets with 10% continuous overload capacity), Hydro Electric Projects on turn key job basis. On account of the failure to the T.G. Sets, to work properly, due to the defective supply, a dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 and as per clause contained in purchase order/agreement, the respondent No. 2 was appointed as the arbitrator before whom both the parties put in appearance and filed their statements of claims. Replies and rejoinders were also filed. Both the parties also produced their documents in support of their cases. Thereafter, the arbitrator after applying its judicious mind passed the award of Rs. 80 lacs that too without interest in favour of the respondent No. 1. However, it was ordered that if the petitioners fail to clear the award amount within three months from the date of award, then respondent No. 1 would be entitled to recover interest @ 12% per annum, whereas, the respondent No. 1 was also awarded a sum of Rs. 12,22,539/ - against claims No. 1, 5 and 6. It was also held that the petitioner shall adjust a sum of Rs. 2 lacs already received by way of bank guarantee of the respondent No. 1. If they fail to pay the amount within three moths from the date of the award, the respondent shall be entitled to the interest at the same rate. It was also observed that after adjusting the amount so allowed to the respondent No. 1 to the tune of Rs. 12,22,539/ - plus Rs. 2 lacs so allowed on the account of the bank guarantee, the total comes to Rs. 65,77,161/ - along with interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f. 21.3.1998.
(2.) AGAINST the said award, the petitioner has filed the objection before the trial court. The respondent No. 1 also filed the objection petition. However, the trial court while dismissing the objection petition made the award as rule of the court. The appellate court also upheld the judgment. Arguments heard.
(3.) AT the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner, without disputing the authority of the arbitrator and challenging the terms of the agreement, has raised only point that since no reasons were recorded by the arbitrator for awarding a sum of Rs. 80 lacs on account of the goods supplied to the respondent No. 1, therefore, the arbitrator cannot be said to be acted in a judicious manner.;