VINEY MITTAL, J. - (1.) ON a request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner,at the out set, the present civil revision is treated to be a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) THE petitioner before this Court is a Contractor. He has challenged the order dated September 4, 1998 passed by the learned Additional District Judge whereby the appeal filed by the present respondents has been allowed by the appellate Court and as a result thereof, the order dated October 24, 1996 passed by the learned trial Court has been set aside. The learned trial Judge had dismissed the objections filed by the present respondents and consequently made award dated April 7, 1993 as a rule of the court. The Contractor had been awarded some work and on completion thereof had submitted final bills along with his claim for extra work. There was a dispute between the parties with regard to the entitlement of the Contractor. Consequently, the matter was referred to an Arbitrator for adjudication as per the agreement between the parties, The Arbitrator through his award dated April 7, 1993 upheld the claim of the Contractor and awarded an amount of Rs. 1,92,359.06 to the Contractor. The Contractor filed an application under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for making the aforesaid award as a rule of the Court. Objections were filed by the respondents. It was claimed by them that the Arbitrator had misconducted himself and proceedings and, therefore, the award of the Arbitrator could not be made the rule of the rule.
(3.) THE learned trial Court rejected the objections filed by the respondents. It was held that the award dated April 7, 1993 passed by the Arbitrator was legal and valid. Consequently,the aforesaid award was ordered to be made rule of the Court.;