A.P. Chowdhri, J. - (1.) THIS is first appeal against the order of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Ropar, dated August 17, 1988, making award of the arbitrator rule of the Court and dismissing objections filed by the State.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Amar Nath Aggarwal Constructions Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the contractor') entered into an agreement with the State of Punjab for the construction of a siphon across Sangrao Nadi at RD 29.660 KM of Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal (SYL canal for short). Certain disputes and differences having arisen, the contractor wrote to the Chief Engineer to refer the matter to arbitrator in terms of the arbitration clause. By order dated April 24, 1987, the Chief Engineer appointed Mr. S.S. Sandhu, Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle - III, SYL Canal Project, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. The contractor submitted statement of claims, to which written statement was filed on behalf of the State. Replication and rejoinder thereto were also filed. Both the parties filed documents on which they relied and the arbitrator, after hearing both the portion gave his award dated August, 17, 1987. The arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs. 29,40,775/ - besides future interest at the rate of 12% per annum in favour of the contractor and against the State. The contractor made an application to the Court for having the award filed in the Court and to make the same rule of the Court. The State filed objections under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act. The Senior Subordinate Judge, Ropar, disposed of the objections and made the award rule of the Court. A decree was drawn up on the basis of the order. Aggrieved, the State has preferred this appeal. I have heard Mr. G.K. Chatrath, learned Advocate -General, Punjab, for the appellant -State and Mr. Hemant Kumar for the respondent -contractor and have perused the record with their assistance.
(3.) IT will be convenient to deal with certain contentions raised in this appeal before dealing with claims under different heads. VIS MAJOR In order to deal with this ground, the following facts are relevant. The agreement was signed on September 26, 1985. In pursuance of the agreement work actually commenced at site on October 15, 1985. There was an agitation by the farmers led by Bhartiya Kisan Union (BKU, for short) that work could not be started without first acquiring the land. Admittedly, the work remained suspended from October 22, 1985 to September 15, 1986 account of the agitation. The basis for the claim of the contractor was that they had mobilised their resources and had started the work and they were prevented from executing the work on account of the agitation.;