B. Prakash Rao, J.

This appeal is at the instance of the unsuccessful petitioners in the Court below in an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in brevity the Act) seeking to set aside the Award dated 23-12-2002 passed by the arbitrators, who are added as the respondents 2 to 4, allowing certain claims made at the instance of the respondent No.1, as per the order dated 30-10-2004 in O.P. No.633 of 2003 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. Heard Sri D. Sudershan Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri C. Kodanda Ram, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent No.1. The respondents 2 to 4 are the arbitral panel.

3. The facts which are not in dispute are that the appellants herein, (conveniently called as petitioners herein) who are the successors to the former statutory Board, namely A.P. State Electricity Board, floated the Global Tenders on 28-4-1998 as a part of international competitive bidding in regard to the World Bank Aided Power Restructuring Project for high priority requirement in transmission and distribution system of the appellants on a fixed price basis, wherein the respondent No.1 filed its quotation on 9-7-1998. The work contemplated was the procurement of AAA conductors required for laying 33 KV, 11 KV and L T lines in six lots and total value of the bid was for US $91 ,03,250 exclusive of sales tax and excise duty but including freight and insurance. The bids were opened on 17-7-1998 and ultimately the bid of the 1st respondent, who having been found to be lowest was accepted and it was notified to him as per letter dated 30-1-1999, which was received on 12-2-1999. Accordingly, a letter of intent was given on the even date to the respondent No.1 and he has furnished performance security on 18-2-1999 in the form of bank guarantee for 5% of the contract value i.e. for US $4,55, 163 in favour of the appellants from the Syndicate Bank which was extended upto 9.5.2001. The appellants had accepted the same by letter dated 26-2-1 999 and issued a purchase order on 4-3-1999 containing terms and conditions of the supply of goods and mode of payment. The special conditions under the contract and the general conditions of contract along with technical specifications of the bid package, as entered into between the parties features amongst of the following important conditions:

(a) The payments for the supplies made have to be paid in US $ (Dollars).

(b) All payments ~have to be made through Letter(s) of Credit (UC) in US$.

(c) The delivery of goods has to commence within two months from the date of opening of UC for 10% Advance payment by the APTRANSCO and the entire contract quantity has to be supplied by the GPTL, within six months from the date of commencement of delivery.

(d) LIC for 10% advance payment has to be opened by the APTRANSCO i.e. the purchaser within 30 days from the date of signing of the contract agreement i.e. 4-3-1999

(e) The date of commencement of delivery has to be reckoned from the date of actual payment of 10% advance.

(f) The bank guarantee for US $ 9,05,800 equivalent to 10% advance amount has to be furnished valid until the entire quantity of goods under the contract are delivered i.e., the final lot is delivered.

(g) The payment of 10% advance shall be effected against the LIC on submission of performance security claim in the prescribed proforma and 10% advance bank guarantee as per Clause 6(i) of the purchase order.

4. Accordingly, the contract of demand was duly signed on 4-3-1999 between the respondentNo1 and the appellants. The entire transaction and the contract as entered into with the terms and conditions contained therein, includes as a part thereof, the following documents viz.:

(a) The bid form and price schedule submitted by the bidder/GPTL.

(b) The schedule of requirements.

(c) The technical specifications.

(d) The general conditions of contract.

(e) The special con