JUDGMENT :

1. This civil revision has been filed against the impugned award (Annexure-A/1) dated 18.1.2017, passed by the Chhattisgarh Arbitration Tribunal, Raipur in Reference Petition No. 1 of 2016.

2. The revisioner/applicant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Respondent No.1 – State of Chhattigarh floated a notice inviting tender dated 5.9.2006 for construction and maintenance of rural roads. The applicant submitted his bid which was the lowest and on that basis, he was awarded the tender vide agreement dated 23.4.2007. As per the requirement of the contract, the applicant has deposited 5% of the contract amount amounting to Rs.35,72,000/- as security deposit in terms of clause 33 of the Agreement and also submitted performance security for the same. Eight roads were proposed to be constructed under this agreement, which are as under:-

1. Nayapura to Patpar

2. Gaourmati to Gaourjhumar

3. Main Road to G. Khamariya

4. Main Road to Magarwah

5. Nawagaon to Pailpur

6. Tendu to Karhi

7. Thankhamhariya Saja Road to Kotgaon

8. Singhangarh to Kuanrachhriya

The date of completion of the project was proposed as 22.4.2008.

3. There was a provision for extension of the completion date in the agreement. The applicant could not complete one of the roads, namely, Tendu-Karhi Road within the stipulated time and sought extension of time, which was extended up to 15.6.2008 and then, on his prayer, a second extension was given up till 15.12.2008, subsequent to which, construction of 7 roads were completed. Then, he made a prayer for extension of time on which, the extension was again granted up till 15.2.2009. The applicant could not complete the work and then again made a prayer for extension of time till 31.3.2009. The work on the last road was completed and a Work Done Certificate was issued by respondent No.1 in favour of the applicant on 13.4.2009 (Annexure-A/20). The Chief Executive Officer then issued an order dated 13.10.2009 (Annexure-A/21) granting Ex-post Facto Approval for extension of the time for completion of work and liquidated damages was ordered to be recovered from the applicant, by invoking clause 44 of the Agreement.

The applicant then filed a Writ Petition No.3532 of 2010 praying to quash the order dated 13.10.2009 (Annexure-A/21). The petition was disposed of by order dated 16.7.2010, directing the respondent No.1 to decide the representation of the applicant within a period of four weeks. The representation made by the applicant was rejected by the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.1 vide order dated 3.9.2010 (Annexure-P/26). The applicant has not been paid fully and an amount of Rs.40,20,846/-, which is an outstanding amount, remain unpaid by the respondents.

4. The Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.1 has also issued a letter dated 28.2.2012 for recovery of liquidated damages from the revisioner/applicant. The applicant then raised a dispute and invoked clause 25 of the Contract Agreement providing for arbitration by a letter dated 30.8.2012 addressed to respondent No.2 (Annexure – A/35). Respondent No.1 then informed the applicant vide letter dated 1.10.2012 (Annexure- A/36) that the amount of liquidated damages is Rs.68,36,400/- has been levied upon the revisioner/applicant and a partial amount of Rs.18,81,117/- has been deducted from the last payment. The applicant was also directed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.49,55,283/- within 7 days and it was informed that in case of his failure, the fixed deposit receipts of surety shall be encashed.

5. The applicant then filed a Writ Petition No. 2022 of 2012 praying for quashment of the order dated 1.10.2012 (Annexure-A/36), which was dismissed by the order dated 27.11.2012 on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy under clause 24 & 25 of the Agreement. The applicant then preferred SLP before Hon'ble the Supreme Court which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 6057 of 2015 which was disposed of by the order dated 11.8.