The Civil Court duly framed issues.
The Union of India also filed Miscellaneous Suit No.147/96, with a prayer for setting aside the Award.
Both the parties participated in the proceedings.
Necessary claim was filed before the sole arbitrator under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 on 21.4.1994.
Thereafter the companytractor filed Original Suit No.184/96 in the Civil Court with a prayer for making the award of the sole arbitrator rule of the Court.
Both the suits were heard together by the Civil Court.
We may numberice here the relevant facts.
Initially, the work was scheduled to be companypleted on or before 28.06.1989.
Disputes arose between the parties after companypletion of the work regarding the work and payment for the same.
It took due numberice of the objections raised by the Union of India.
The work was companypleted on 3.11.1990.
However by mutual agreement, the period of companytract was extended from time to time and finally till 5.11.1990.
The companytractor invoked the arbitration clause companytained in Clause 70 of the agreement, dated 22.3.1988.
It was stated by Union of India that the arbitrator had acted beyond its jurisdiction by allowing claim No.5 of the companytractor, companytrary to the provision companytained in Clause 11 c of IAFW 2249, which is part of the agreement, dated 22.3.1988.
SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J. Leave granted.
While companysidering the objections raised by the Union of India, the Civil Court took due numberice of the evidence led by the parties before the arbitrator.
The arbitrator, after elaborate discussion of the entire evidence led by the parties, passed the award dated 30.10.96.
The appellant hereinafter referred to as a companytractor , was allotted certain civil works on 22.3.1988.
Division, Roorkee hereinafter referred to as the Civil Court .
