JUDGMENT :

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) :

1. The Union of India, through the General Manager of the Metro Railway, has filed the present challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1996 Act”) against an award whereby several monetary claims of the claimant/respondent were allowed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the three-member Arbitral Tribunal decided on the validity of termination of the contract of the claimant despite such relief having not been sought by the claimant in its statement of claim. That apart, termination falls under the ‘excepted clauses’ of the contract and thus, could not have been adjudicated upon by the Tribunal.

3. Claims 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8, which were all allowed, are excepted matters as per Clause 63 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC). While determining claim no.1, the Tribunal went into the veracity of measurements and based its award on the basis of such measurements, which falls within the excepted clauses as well.

4. The contract between the parties specifically states that no interest is payable, despite which, under claim no.11, the Tribunal granted interest to