Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab vs M/S Kuljit Singh & Co on 25 March, 2010
Review Application No. 34-CII of 2010 in 1
Civil Revision No. 5182 of 2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Review Application No. 34-CII of 2010 in
Civil Revision No. 5182 of 2003
Date of Decision: 25.03.2010
State of Punjab.
... Petitioner
Versus
M/s Kuljit Singh & Co.
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER
Present: Mr. P.S. Rana, Advocate,
for the applicant-respondent.
SHAM SUNDER, J.
This application, on behalf of the applicant-respondent, under Order 47, Rule I, read with Section 151 CPC, for review/recal/modification of the judgement dated 08.01.2010, passed by this Court, in Civil Revision No. 5182 of 2003, titled as, 'State of Punjab Vs. M/s Kuljit Singh and Company', has been filed.
2. The Counsel for the applicant-respondent, submitted that the Arbitrator, gave reasons, in the award, that it was, undoubtedly, a commercial transaction and the department also charged interest @ 15% per annum, on the mobilization and machinery advance, in terms of Clause 8 of the general conditions of the contract, and, therefore, awarded interest @ 15% per annum, upto the date of Review Application No. 34-CII of 2010 in 2 Civil Revision No. 5182 of 2003 decree. He further submitted that the Civil Court, allowed interest @ 12% per annum, from the date of decree, till such period the amount was realized. He further submitted that, there was no justification, whatsoever, for this Court, to reduce the rate of interest, more particularly, without considering the case law. He further submitted that the sole Arbitrator, gave the reasons, for allowing interest @ 15% per annum, and the same, was rightly upheld, by the both the Courts below. He further submitted that, there are sufficient grounds, for review , and, in the interest of justice, the application, be allowed, and interest @ 15% per annum, as awarded by the Arbitrator upto the passing of the decree and @ 12% per annum, awarded by the Courts below from date of decree be restored.
3. After giving my thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, raised by the Counsel for the applicant-respondent, in my considered opinion, the review application, is liable to be dismissed, for the reasons, to be recorded, hereinafter. This Court, while passing the judgement dated 08.01.2010, in the aforesaid revision, took into consideration, a number of factors and then came to the conclusion, that the interest, awarded @ 15% per annum, by the Arbitrator, was unreasonable. This Court, also came to the conclusion, that the future interest, awarded, by the Courts below, @ 12% per annum, could be said to be arbitrary. It was, under these circumstances, that the interest, awarded by the Arbitrator @ 15% per annum, was reduced to 12% per annum, and the future interest, Review Application No. 34-CII of 2010 in 3 Civil Revision No. 5182 of 2003 awarded by the Courts below, @ 12% per annum, was reduced to 6% per annum. There is no illegality, apparent on the face of record, warranting the review of the judgement dated 08.01.2010. No ground, for review, is, thus, made out.
4. For the reasons recorded above, the review application, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same stands dismissed.
25.03.2010 (SHAM SUNDER) Amodh JUDGE