He rejected the claim of appellant for damages on account of loss of profit and loss of business as also the interest up to the date of claim statement.
As a companysequence, the application for setting aside the award was dismissed by judgment dated 20.3.1992.
In pursuance of the said companytract the respondent supplied 5,59,554 mats.
5,00,000.00 Refund of earnest money Rs.
The respondent made a companynter claim for Rs.8,16,733/70, made up of Rs.1,78,698.68 towards the extra companyt incurred for risk purchase and Rs.6,38,035.02 towards storage charges for the rejected mats, which were number removed from the warehouses of the respondent.
6,00,000.00 Loss of business on account of supply orders placed by the appellant with another agency Rs.
The arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs.11,80,132.48 towards the price of material supplied at 85 of the price and Rs.25,000/ towards refund of earnest money deposit, in all, Rs.12,05,132.48 with pendente lite interest at the rate of 11 per annum on Rs.11,80,132.48 up to the date of the award.
2,87,340.82 The respondent resisted the claim.
The claims of the companytractor were as follows Amount due towards supplies Price of 5,59,554 mats at Rs.3.35 each Rs.18,74,505.90 Less Amount paid by respondent Rs.
The arbitrator rejected the companynter claims of the respondent.
Feeling aggrieved, the respondent filed an intra court appeal.
The said award was challenged by the respondent by filing a petition under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for short the Act for setting aside the award in the High Court of Calcutta.
It companytended that the mats supplied were of sub standard quality and did number companyform to the specifications, and therefore the entire supply was rejected that the appellant had failed to companyply with the arrangements mutually agreed in the telex dated 15.12.1984 and letter dated 2.3.1985 that the appellant did number companytact the Regional Offices for joint inspection of the defective mats and that as the appellant companymitted breach by failing to supply mats according to the specifications and failed to act in accordance with the arrangements arrived at between the parties, it was number entitled to any relief.
As its demands were number companyplied with, at the instance of the appellant, the disputes were referred to arbitration.
The arbitrator made a reasoned award dated 31.8.1988.
4,86,114.75 Rs.13,88,391.15 Initial claim Rs.13,94,710.60 subsequently reduced Loss of profit at the rate of Rs.1 lac p.m. from Dec., 1984 to May, 1985 Rs.
The respondent also referred to as the Corporation entered into a companytract dated 9.6.1984 with the appellant also referred to as the companytractor for supply of 32 lacs bamboo mats at a price of Rs.3.35 per mat to be supplied by the appellant, inclusive of sales tax, F.O.R. destination.
25,000.00 Interest on the balance sale price at 20 per annum up to date of claims statement 30.9.1985 Rs.
V.RAVEENDRAN, J. This appeal by special leave relates to the validity of an arbitration award made against the respondent.
The companytractor sent various companymunications requesting for joint inspection and payment.
