An award can only be set aside for error which is on its face.

GHOSE, J.

1. THIS appeal is directed against an order passed by the Hon'ble First Court on 1st April, 2010 in A.P. No. 164 of 2008 whereby the learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the application for setting aside of an award published by the leaned Arbitrator on 31st December, 2007.

2. THE disputes between the parties relate to a work/contract dated 27th June, 1982 for construction of two school buildings and one block of flats at Beida District Libya. The value of the contract was for an aggregate sum of 3,171,53.66 Libyan Dinars (hereinafter referred to as LD). It is admitted by the respondent that an amount of Rs.4,87,723.00 LD has already been paid by the appellant to the respondent in respect of the said contract.

3. THE facts of the case briefly are as follows :

4. A suit was filed in 1985 by the appellant for recovery of interest bearing loans from the respondent. The said suit was stayed by the Court on an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, on the ground that the disputes between the parties are covered under the arbitration clause contained in the agreement. In these circumstances, the matter was referred before the departmental Arbitrator and subsequently by an order dated 1st February, 1993 the reference was directed to be presided over by the learned Arbitrator whose award has been assailed in the proceedings filed under Sections 30 and 33 of the said Act. It further appears from the facts that the contractor filed a counter statement and forwarded his claim and further dealt with the claim made by the petitioner. Accordingly, the status of the parties was subsequently changed at the 3rd meeting held before the learned Arbitrator and it is recorded in Paragraph 23 of the award "the original claimant became the respondent and the original respondent became the claimant". The pleadings were filed and the reference commenced and it appears that the several meetings held before the award was published and admittedly award was published on 31st December, 2007. It appears from the award that the contractor was directed to be entitled a sum of Rs.1,46 crores plus interest. The award also finds that the employer entitled to a sum of Rs.30.39 lakhs without any interest.

5. IN the statement of claim which was filed by the contractor before the arbitrator, the contractor prayed inter alia on the heads as stated hereinafter:-

6. THE total claim of the contractor was Rs.2, 66,09,320/- and out of which the learned Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs.1,46,22,219.80 including interest thereon. THE counter-claim of Rs.2,24,59,259/-was also filed on behalf of the Hindustan Steel Works and Construction Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'HSWCL'). THE learned Arbitrator allowed the counter-claim of the HSWCL to the tune of Rs. 30,39,170/- together with interest thereon. The award was challenged before the learned Trial Count inter alia on the following grounds:- (i) Non-application of mind and error apparent on the fact of the award; (ii) Arbitrator did not give credit to the appellant the sum admitted to have been received by the contractor; (iii) The arbitrator had only dealt with third head of the claim but not dealt with other two heads of the claim; (iv) The arbitrator did not consider the point of interest bearing loan allegedly given to the contractor/respondent; and (v) The claim before the Arbitrator allegedly exceeded from the claim in the alleged letter of reference dated 9th July, 1984 (Pg. 2 of Paper Book Vol. I).

7. THE Hon'ble Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the application and the Court held that the arbitrator cannot be said to have fallen in any great error that would prompt a correction in proceedings of the present nature. His Lordship further held as follows;- 'THE particular challenge urged by the petitioner in respect of some of the sub-heads of claim out of the 75 considered by the arbitrator also seems to be out of place. It is the petitioner's contention that eig