S.S.SARON, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner Food Corporation of India, ('FCI' for short) through its District Manager, Ranika Bagh, Amritsar, against the order dated 11.1.1993 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar, whereby the appeal against the order dated 23.11.1987 passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Amritsar, had been dismissed.
(2.) RESPONDENT Ram Lubhaya was a contractor of the petitioner-FCI in connection with the work relating to the loading, unloading and transportation of food grains and allied material. A written work contract agreement was entered into between the parties. Disputes arose amongst them relating to the work agreement. Respondent Ram Lubhaya, on account of the dispute having arisen submitted an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act 1940 ( 'the Act' for short). The matter was referred to arbitration by the Managing Director of the Food Corporation of India in terms of order dated 6.5.1981. Later vide order dated 17.5.1982, the earlier order was modified and the Managing Director of the Food Corporation of India was authorised to appoint any person to act as an arbitrator to go into the dispute between the parties. Shri P.C. Rao, Additional Legal Advisor to Govt. of India, Ministry of Law and Justice was appointed as a Sole Arbitrator by the Managing Director of the Food Corporation of India. A copy of the order regarding appointment of an a arbitrator as made by the Managing Director of Food Corporation of India was endorsed to Ram Lubhaya-respondent. The arbitration proceedings were taken up on 2.8.1982 and notice of the same was given to both the parties for 8.9.1982 and they were required to file their respective claims. The petitioner-FCI filed its claim on 5.1.1983 before the arbitrator. However, Ram Lubhaya- respondent could not be served in the proceedings. The registered cover sent to him for his appearance before the arbitrator on 5.1.1983 was received back with the report that he had refused service. In any case another opportunity was given and the proceedings were adjourned for 25.1.1983 for filing counter claim by Ram Lubhaya-respondent. The case was to be taken up on 5.2.1983 which was declared as a holiday. The case was then taken up on 7.2.1983 and was adjourned for 7.3.1983 for appearance of Ram Lubhaya-respondent before the arbitrator. The said date i.e. 7.3.1983 was again declared a holiday and the case was adjourned to 8.4.1983. The case was then adjourned to 19.5.1983. However, Ram Lubhaya-respondent did not appear before the arbitrator. The evidence of the petitioner-FCI was then closed for the purpose of making the award. The petitioner-FCI was asked by the arbitrator to submit the requisite stamp papers and the case was adjourned to 25.5.1983 on which date the award was made by the arbitrator whereby Ram Lubhaya-respondent was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 1,70,061.34 to the petitioner-FCI.
(3.) AGAINST the award dated 25.5.1983, the petitioner-FCI filed an application under Section 18 of the Act for making the award of the Arbitrator as a rule of the court. Ram Lubhaya-respondent appeared in Court and filed objections under Sections 30, 33, 16 and 19 of the Act challenging the legality and validity of the award. In the objection petition filed by Ram Lubhaya- respondent, it was pleaded that no valid and legal notice of filing the award in the Court was served upon him, besides the impugned award was an ex-parte award and no pre-emptory notice of the proceedings against the objectors was served upon him. It was further pleaded that the application for making the impugned award as rule of the Court had not been filed by the competent person i.e. by the District Manager of the Food Corporation of India. Further objection was raised that it was not filed within the statutory period of four months of the appointment of the arbitrator and no extension was given to the arbitrator for giving his award. The impugned award infact was passed after the expiry of the stipulated period of four months and the proceedings before the arbitrator were bad on that ground. It was also pleaded that the impugned award had not been recorded on requisite stamp papers. Moreover the arbitrator committed judicial misconduct in making the impugned award in as much as he imported his personal knowledge without appreciating the proposition of law with respect to risk and costs and penalty clause etc. The application filed by the petitioner-FCI for making the award as rule of the Court was dismissed by the Learned Sub Judge Ist Class on 23.11.1987. It was held that the award was not legally valid as no reasons in support of the award which was a condition prescribed in terms of the clause 19 of the Works Contract Agreement had been recorded. The petitioner-FCI aggrieved against the order of the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Amritsar. The learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar, to whom the appeal was assigned dismissed the same vide his impugned order dated 11.1.1993 which is assailed by the petitioner-FCI.;