Union Of India vs Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd on 24 December, 2022
19. As regards counter claim, the Arbitrator has assigned
reasons for not allowing the counter claim of the petitioner. He
has referred clause 11.1 of the agreement and considered the
contention of the parties and observed that asper the initial
letter of the petitioner dated 02.07.2012 through which
OMP No. 195/2019 UOI Vs. Indian Hume Pipe Co Ltd Page No.15 of 20
nomination of Arbitrator was informed, Railway's claim was
NIL. The counter claim was not raised by the petitioner even
when it sent its reply to the respondent's claim. It filed the
counter claim on 25.09.2013. On 10.07.2014, it sent a letter
giving the details of the counter claims but without any base of
calculation. It even failed to submit the calculation of counter
claims on the basis of actual facts and provisions contained in
the agreement nor produced any document nor showed the
provisions in the contract agreement, on the basis of which, the
counter claim was calculated. He did not find merit in the
argument of the petitioner that supply status of sleepers during
eight months was not satisfactory and on account of delayed
supply, track renewal works hampered and Railways suffered
huge loss and recovery should be made from the respondent as
per clause 11.1. He held that if the Railway had suffered huge
loss on account of delay in supply of sleepers during initial
eight months, it should have been recovered during the
payments at that time but no such recovery was made from the
respondent during the actual execution of the contract. It was
held that petitioner is not sure about the loss and the counter
claim given by the respondent is without any base. In the
absence of any documentary proof and base, the counter claim
is completely not admissible.