Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. By way of present objection petition brought under the provisions of Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, petitioner, a company of Government of India, has assailed the Arbitration No. 398/2016 (21208/2016) Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs Delkon India (P) Ltd. Page 1 of 34 pages arbitration award dated 05.02.2008 passed against it by the arbitral tribunal consisting of sole arbitrator, whereby the present petitioner was held liable to pay to the present respondent a total sum of Rs. 12,11,031.80 alongwith pendente lite and future interest at a rate of 15% per annum. On the basis of caveat, counsel for the present respondent appeared and accepted notice. Originally, this objection petition was filed on the Original Side of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court but thereafter, on enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction, this petition was transferred and my predecessor opted to retain it in this court for hearing. I have heard learned counsel for both sides who took me through the complete arbitral records as well as the relevant law.

4.9 The delay in completion of work and the contract period spreading over for 12.75 months was solely attributable to the delayed, poor and unsatisfactory work performance of the present respondent at the site.

Arbitration No. 398/2016 (21208/2016) Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs Delkon India (P) Ltd. Page 8 of 34 pages

5. On the basis of above pleadings, the learned arbitrator conducted arbitration proceedings and delivered the impugned award thereby rejecting claim no. 1, completely allowing claims no. 2 to 4 and partly allowing claims no. 5 to 7, thereby directing the present petitioner to pay to the present respondent a total sum of Rs. 12,11,031.80 with future interest at a rate of 15% per annum. Hence, the present objection petition.

14. The scope of judicial review of an arbitral award is akin to review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India of the decision of bodies, where it is a settled principle of law that judicial review is of the decision making process and not of the decision itself on merits and the same cannot be converted into an appeal. Even Section 34 (2) (a) of the Arbitration No. 398/2016 (21208/2016) Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs Delkon India (P) Ltd. Page 12 of 34 pages Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 amply clarifies the grounds of challenge on the lines of violation of principles of natural justice in making of the award or invalidity of the arbitral agreement and non­ arbitrability of disputes arbitrated and composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure being not in accordance with the agreement between the parties. None of the legislated grounds permits to challenge an arbitral award on merits by way of fresh appreciation of evidence.

54. Therefore, it is held that the present petitioner is not liable to pay to the present respondent any money towards interest - be it for pre award or for post award period.

CLAIM No. 7 (COSTS)

55. Learned arbitrator in the impugned award directed the present petitioner to pay to the present respondent a sum of Rs. 71,500/­ Arbitration No. 398/2016 (21208/2016) Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs Delkon India (P) Ltd. Page 32 of 34 pages towards costs of arbitration, applying the criteria that fee of the arbitrator had been fixed at Rs. 12,000/­ per hearing plus secretarial charges of Rs.1,000/­ per hearing and both sides had paid a total sum of Rs.1,43,000/­ for eleven hearings and the present petitioner must bear the entire cost by paying a sum of Rs.71,500/­ (Rs. 1,43,000/­ divided by 2) towards costs to the present respondent.