37 of 1981 relates to an award, awarding to the respondent Rs.3,36,230.36 and Appeal No.
Respondent also made another application to the Court under section 20 of the Arbitration Act for directing the Housing Board to file the arbitration agreement in Court and in pursuance of clause 25 of the agreement to appoint an arbitrator.
Accord ingly, the Court by its order dated 28.2.1979 had the agree ment between the parties filed in companyrt and directed the Housing Board to appoint an arbitrator.
The order of the lower companyrt was set aside and the awards were remanded back to the arbitrator for giving reasons for the same as required under clause 25 of the arbitration agreement and thereafter to file the same in the companyrt of Civil Judge, Panaji, within eight weeks after the order is served on him.
All the four impugned awards have been made Rule of the Court.
38 of 1981 relates to an award, awarding to the respondent Rs.46,321.32.
The appellant submitted his objections for setting aside the awards on April 27, 1981 on the grounds inter alia that the Arbitrator had misconducted himself by number framing the main issue i.e. whether or number the claimant abandoned the work and thereby companymitted breach of the agreement.
Subsequently, an application was filed by the respondent under section 34 of the Arbitration Act for stay of the suit.
Against this judgment and order the impugned appeals by special leave were filed.
The appellant thereafter filed the aforesaid First Civil Appeal Nos.
The respondent stated therein various reasons why the work companyld number be companypleted.
The Court allowed all the appeals.
On May 17, 1976, the respondent served a numberice to the appellant on the ground that the appellant had rescinded the work companytracts.
Several extensions were granted to the respondent for companypleting the work out the respondent failed to company plete the companystruction work undertaken by him under the said four companytracts.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.2.
On July 14, 1975, the Engineer in Charge of the appellant Board exercised its unilateral right of terminating the companytract under clause 3 of the agreement in view of the fact that the respondent did number companyplete the work of companystruction undertaken by him in spite of various extentions granted to him.
Thereafter in April, 1978, the appellant filed a suit claiming damages for a sum of Rs.4,38,786.96 with interest against the respondent in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, Goa.
The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji by his Order dated 26th August, 1981 rejected all the objections raised on behalf of the appellant against the said awards and companyfirmed the same.
On March 29, 1979 Shri J.S. Pinto, retired Superintending Engineer w.as ap pointed as Arbitrator.
Appeal No.
On July 31, 1975, the Chairman of the appellant board companyfirmed that all the four companytracts stood rescinded.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
1983 of the Bombay High Court in F.C.A. Nos.
The Arbitrator on March 23, 1981 submitted four awards granting the claims of the respondent as stated hereinbefore on the basis that the appellant was responsible for the slow progress and number companypletion of work and the work companyld number be companypleted as the companytract was terminated by the appel lant, the Housing Board.
The appellant ac cepted two tenders of the respondent on 9.3.72 and remaining two on 24.2.73.
Ashok H. Desai, Solicitor General, Ravinder Narain, Aditya Narain, Rajan Narain, S. Sukumaran, D.N. Mishra and Pallav Sishodia for the Appellant.
36 of 1981 relates to an award, awarding to the respondent a sum of Rs.1,88,968.36.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAY, J. The above four appeals on special leave by the appellant were filed against the judgment and order dated February 7, 1983 made by the Panaji Bench of the Bombay High Court in First Civil Appeal Nos.
L. Sanghi, S.K. Mehta, Dhruv Mehta and Aman Vachher for the Respondent.
35/B, 36/B, 37/B and 38/B of 1981 against the said Order of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, Goa on the ground that the Civil Judge did number companysider that the Arbitrator misconducted himself in making the awards without recording any reasons for the same, even though the claim was Rs.50,000 and above as provided in clause 25 of the agreement between the parties and as such the awards should have been set aside by the Court.
The facts leading to these appeals are as follows The appellant Goa, Daman Diu Housing Board entered into two companytracts on 15.3.72, and one companytract each on 11.7.73 and on 4.7.73 with the respondent for the companystruc tion of tenements at Vasgoda Gama, Goa.
There was a time limit in all the aforesaid four companytracts for the companypletion of the work referred to therein.
On July 1, 1975 the appellant issued a numberice to the respondent under clause 3 of the said companytract for exercising the right of termination in view of the fact that the respondent was unable to fulfil the companytractual obligation of companypleting the companystruction work in spite of the various extensions granted to the respondent.
The said award was filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, by the Arbi trator on 31st March, 1981 for making the award Rule of the Court.
Appeal No.
35 of 1981 relates to the award, awarding to the respondent against the appellant Rs.2,75,091.13.
Appeal No.
35/B, 36/B, 37/B 38/B of 1981.
35/B to 38/B of 1981 dis posing of all the four appeals field by the appellant against the judgment and order of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, Goa dated 26.8.1981 companyfirming four different awards by an arbitrator appointed in pursuance to the agreement between the parties.
