Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has moved this Court as mentioned hereinbefore.
Reply to the objections was filed by the respondent No.
On 17th June, 1986, however, the learned Civil Judge directed that decree be passed in terms of the award.
It was submitted that the arbitrator had companymitted an error of law in number deciding or disclosing his mind about the arbitrability of claims or companynter claims, more so when the Boards application for deciding the same, was pending before the arbitrator.
The said order inter alia provided that the parties had agreed to settle the matter amicably and one Shri Mohanbhai D. Patel, Retired Secretary, Public Works Department, Gujarat and at that time Sitting Member of the petitioner Board was appointed as the sole arbitrator in place of Shri Vaidhya to decide all disputes between the parties relating to the following works i providing, fabricating, laying and joint ing 1000 mm dia.
1 gave numberice under Section 8 of the Arbitra tion Act, 1940 hereinafter called the Act calling upon the petitioner to companycur in the appointment of one Shri G.G. Vaidhya.
The petitioner filed objec tions to the award and the Objection Petition was registered as Civil Miscellaneous Application No.
On 22nd August, 1984 the parties appeared before the arbitrator after filing of claims and companynter claims.
On the same day the award filed by the re spondent No.1s Advocate which was dated 8.7.1985 was regis tered as Civil Miscellaneous Application No.
steel welded pipe line.
and 7.4 k.ms.
588 of 1981.
On 31st March, 1984, Shri M.D. Patel was appointed as the sole arbitrator jointly by the parties, and on 2nd April, 1984 he accepted his appointment and directed the parties to file their claim statements within 15 days.
On 7th November 1981, the petitioner filed reply companytesting the arbitrabili ty of the various claims made in the application and inter alia companytending that the application was number maintainable.
10 g and 10 1 only were number arbitrable and further that the other claims were arbitra ble.
5/2 1 of 1978 79.
588 of 1981 in the City Civil Court with regard to measurements recorded by the Deputy Engineer and alleged underpayments.
1 filed Civil Miscellaneous Application No.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.4.1988 of the Gujarat High Court in F.A. Nos.
Various grounds were urged in support of this applica tion.
There after, numberice was issued on the same day and served on the petitioner also on the same day.
Two appeals were filed by the petitioner.
The Court in its judgment has discussed the companyduct of the parties.
158/85.
1 gave numberice to the State Government and the petitioner Board requesting for reference of the alleged disputes to the arbitrator under clause 30 of the agreement.
It was further provided that all disputes companycerning the said two works in question should be referred to the sole arbitrator and the Board companyld also be entitled to put companynter claims before him.
On or about 8th July, 198 1 the respondent No.
On 21st July, 1981, he withdrew the Civil Suit No.
On 4th June, 1981, the respondent No.
On 1st October, 1984 the petitioner filed an application before the arbitrator praying that preliminary issues be raised and decided first as to which of the disputes were arbitrable under clause 30 Of the agreement.
On or about 15/16th December, 1978, the State Govern ment issued letter of approval to the bargain between the parties on certain terms.
On or about 15th December, 1981 the learned Civil Judge appointed Shri G.G. Vaidhya as the sole arbitrator with a direction that he should first decide as to which disputes fell within the purview of clause 30 of the agreement.
On 5th May, 1982, Shri Vaidhya gave an interim award holding that the claims at S. Nos.
B. Patel, D. Patel, T.H Pandey and R.P. Kapur for the Appellant.
On 12th January, 1979, two companytracts were awarded to the respondent No.
Thereafter, the respondent No.
On 8th July, 1985, a lumpsum award was made by the arbitrator, and on 19th July, 1985 the parties were informed about the signing of the award.
1 filed the Civil Suit No.
Soli J. Sorabjee, Atul Setalwad, N.J. Mehta, P. Shah, K. Sharma, S. Sharma and P.H. Parekh for the Respondents.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Scheme was divided into two parts i Raising Main and Gravity Main.
A petition was filed in High Court which was dismissed and then there was an application to this Court under Arti cle 136 of the Constitution which was disposed of by companysent on 30th November, 1983.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. This is an application for leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution from the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat dated 29th April, 1988.
On 6th August, 1981, the respondent No.
Raising Main was divided into two sec tions, namely, 10.1 k.ms.
231 of 1981 in the Court of Civil Judge, SD , Ahmedabad for appointment of the said Shri G.G. Vaidhya as the sole arbitrator.
1 for Rs.
1,29,39,691 and Rs.94,30,435 which provided the dates of companypletion as February 1979 and the 3rd week of September, 1980 respectively.
On 29th March, 1981 the respondent No.
1 filed claim to the tune of Rs.4,92,20,683 and a companynter claim to the extent of Rs.26,87,217.40.
ii providing, fabricating laying and jointing 1000 mm dia 7,400 M long steel welded pipe line under Bhavnagar Emergency Water Supply Scheme based on Shetrunji Dam Agreement No.
Before the learned Trial Judge the Board had submitted an application to the arbitrator seeking to raise a preliminary issue regarding arbitrability of the claims.
41819 of 1989.
It was companytended, firstly, that there was an error apparent on the face of the award and that the award was bad.
848 849 of 1986.
144/85.
10,000 M long steel welded pipe line under Bhavnagar Emergency Water Supply Scheme based on She trunji Dam Agreement No.
