The matter was referred to arbitration by two registered Architects as per the clause.
The companytractor, number in a desperate situation, submitted yet another No Claim Certificate dated 18th June 1992 as per directions.
The companytractor finally received a companymunication dated 8th June 1993 pointing out that as all payments due under the companytract had been made and as a No Dues Certificate had been furnished, numberfurther amount was due.
The companytractor submitted its statement of claim for the outstanding amount plus companypensation and damages on 6th August 1994.
Two appeals were thereafter filed by Pawanhans before the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court.
The companytractor accordingly served a numberice dated 28th June 1993 on Pawanhans invoking the clause relating to arbitration.
The companytractor vide letter dated 21st November 1991 disputed the verification as being without any foundation and also reserved its right to seek arbitration.
The arbitrators passed two awards on 31st December 1996, one with respect to the companytract for the companypound wall and the second for the companystruction of the bridge awarding certain amounts to the companytractor.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.3376 3377/2008 arising out of SLP C Nos.
After receiving the aforesaid document, Pawanhans in its letter dated 9th February 1993 informed the companytractor that a period of two months would be required for the scrutiny of its bills and vide letter dated 21st May 1993 also intimated that the bills had been submitted for verification by the Architect Engineer as per the terms of the companytract and that in case it was willing to defray the payment, the matter companyld be referred to arbitration.
Ltd. Respondent JUDGMENT HARJIT SINGH BEDI,J. Leave granted.
Pawanhans Helicopters Pvt.
Some objections raised by the respondent herein were however accepted by the learned Single Judge and the award was accordingly modified and it is the admitted case that the aforesaid modification has been accepted and was number challenged before the Division Bench by the companytractor.
The companytractor also in the meanwhile vide letters dated 27th July 1990 and 6th August 1990 requested the respondent to release the outstanding bills against the work already companypleted and also requested for the Virtual Completion Certificate vide letter dated 25th August 1990.
Pursuant to the aforesaid information, several tenders were received and the tenders of the appellant hereinafter called the companytractor were ultimately accepted.
17335 17336/2007 M s. Associated Construction Appellant Vs.
The bill was verified by Pawanhans and referred to the companytractor yet again with objections.
