JUDGMENT

S.N. Variava, J.—These Appeals are against the Judgment dated 10th December 1999 of the Rajasthan High Court.

2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows.

The Appellants invited tenders for construction of Bhimsagar Dam. Pursuant thereto, various tenders were received. Ultimately the tender of the Respondent was accepted. A contract was awarded to the Respondent on 18th January 1979. Under the contract, the work was to be started on 16th November 1978 and to be completed by 15th May 1981. The work was not completed within this time and time was extended. It appears that the work was not completed within the extended time also. The Appellants terminated the contract and got the balance work completed from some other contractor.

3. The Respondent raised various claims which were rejected by the Appellants. The Respondent, therefore, moved an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for referring the claims mentioned therein to arbitration. By an Order dated 11th November 1982, the District Judge held that only one claim was referable to arbitration and refused to refer the other three claims to arbitration.

4. The Respondent filed an Appeal before the High Court. The High Court by its Order dated 7th June 1984 held that it was for the Arbitrator to decide whether the claims were to be awarded or not. The High Court held that reference could not be refused and, therefore, directed that all the four claims be referred to arbitration.

5. Even before the High Court passed the Order dt. 7th June 1984, the Respondent had, on 31st March 1983, filed another application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. By this application the Respondent sought reference of 24 more claims. The District Judge by an Order dated 1st March 1985 allowed the application.

6. The disputes were referred to two Arbitrators. One Shri M.K. Gambhir was appointed by the Appellants and Shri Leeladhar Aggarwal was appointed by the Respondent. The Respondent, however, filed 39 claims amounting to Rs. 42,59,155.56 before the Arbitrators.

7. Parties led oral and documentary evidence. There was a difference of opinions between the two Arbitrators. Therefore, the Arbitrators referred the disputes to an Umpire viz. one Shri V.K. Gupta.

8. The Appellants filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for removal of Shri V.K. Gupta as an Umpire on the ground of bias. This application was dismissed on 16th November 1993 inter alia on the ground that there was no evidence to show that there was any bias. The Appellants filed a Revision which also came to be dismissed by the High Court in January 1995.

9. The Umpire entered into the reference and gave an Award on 29th May 1995. The operative part of the Award reads as follows:-

“.....And having carefully considered the oral evidence, the documents, site topographical conditions, analysis of rates, technical specifications, other exhibits filed by the parties, the operations required for various items of existing B.S.R. and newly approved rates for Bhim Sagar Dam, Schedule `C’ the conditions of the contract, P.W.F.A.R. and various case laws cited by the parties, I make the award as under:—

I award an amount of Rs. 29,96,060/- (Rupees Twenty nine lacs Ninety-six thousand and sixty only) payable by the Respondents to the Claimants against claim Nos. 1 to 39 except Claim No. 30 (as awarded below separately) and enumerated under paras 15 and 16 of the statement of claims of the Claimants.

I further award refund/release of the Bank F.D.R.S. amounting to Rs. 2,84,000/- (Rupees two lacs eighty-four thousand only) being security deposit by the Respondents in favour of Claimants as claimed under para 17 of the Claim statement.

I award an interest difference of (18 - F.D.R. interest rate on F.D.R. amount w.e.f. 15-12-82 till released to the Claimants or decreed whichever is earlier however the interest already accrued from 17-11-78 upto 14-12.82 is to be reduced from the final calculated sum.

I al