M.C. Sharma, J. - (1.) This misc. appeal under Sec. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short Act) has been filed against the judgment/order dated 8th Sept. 2006 of District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby the objections filed by the appellant under Sec. 34 of the Act were summarily rejected and award dated 31.7.1998 passed by the Arbitrator was upheld. Brief facts of the case are that after issuing tender notice and subsequent correspondence, a work order dated 31.5.1996 was placed by the appellant company to the respondent No. 1. In terms of the said work order, first class shoria robust a salwood N.G. Sleepers of the size 5' x 6' x 41/2 as per railway standard were to be supplied. The quantity was 1800 Nos. Rs. 225 each and order value was Rs. 4,05,000/ -. The work order was to be executed For Sambhar Lake and the payment terms provided that full payment would be made within eight days after receipt, inspection and acceptance of the material at the stores of the appellant company. In pursuance to the purchase order so placed the goods were supplied but dispute arose that the quality of the goods supplied was partly not in accordance with the specifications. Resultantly the arbitration clause between the appellant company and the respondent No. 1 incorporated in the purchase order dated 31.5.1996 was invoked and the dispute came to be referred to the Sole Arbitrator Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) Shri Pana Chand Jain. The learned Arbitrator came to a finding that only 164 sleepers could be said to be below specifications and, therefore deserved to be rejected. According to the Arbitrator, payment of remainder of the sleepers were to be paid for and an award of Rs. 2,58,555.25 came to be passed being the purported remainder price for the sleepers supplied. The operative portion of the order of the Arbitrator reads as under: In view of the fact that there is no agreement for payment of any interest and further in view of the fact that 1836 number of sleepers supply has been held to be as per the specifications only on technical ground that evidence adduced is lacking in material particulars in technical date, as such, I do not deem it proper and reasonable to award interest to the claimant on the amount of Rs. 2,58,55.25. However, the claimant shall be entitled to claim pendente lite and future interest @ 18% interest p.a. on the earnest money of Rs. 13,500 till payment w.e.f. 24.12.97 the date of presentation of petition for arbitration. Further I direct that said sum of Rs. 2,58,555.25 be paid within a period of two months from the date of Award, failing whereof the claimant shall be entitled to claim pendente lite interest @ 18% per annum with effect form 21.4.98 viz. the first date of hearing of arbitration proceedings. "C" forms, if not given, shall be given by the respondent. The parties are to bear their own costs.
(2.) Dissatisfied with the award dated 31.7.1998 passed by the Sole Arbitrator, the appellant company filed objection under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration Act before the DJ Jaipur City. The DJ after considering the award and the objections raised by the appellant company made the award of the Arbitrator as rule of the court and rejected the objections raised by the appellant company observing as under:
(3.) Against the order dated 8th Sept. 2006, of the DJ Jaipur City the appellant company has preferred this appeal.;