( 1 ) ADHERENCE to the basic principles of natural justice in the arbitration proceeding is the pivotal question which arises for consideration in this case. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 7. 12. 1987 by which he made the award given by the arbitrator rule of the court. The arbitrator assessed the loss on account of idle staff, salaries, wages to labour, artisans and establishment costs, hire charges for shuttering materials and rehandling of materials and dismantling and reconstruction of structures pursuant to revision of labour charges etc to rs. 6. 5 lakhs. The arbitrator directed that the amount of Rs. 6. 5 lakhs be paid within one month from the date of making and publishing the award, failing which interest @ 12% per annum will be payable till actual payment or till the award is made rule of the court, whichever is earlier.

( 2 ) THE appellant DDA is aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned Single Judge. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the respondent is not entitled to any amount from the alleged claim because the same has not been proved in accordance with law. The appellant claimed that the claimant (respondent herein) refused to submit the records and the details regarding any loss which has been incurred by them.

( 3 ) THE appellant submitted that despite the arbitrator s direction the claimant (respondent herein) did not produce the relevant records and vouchers etc. for verification and scrutiny. Only fractional or illustrative records were furnished by the claimant respondent and that too after the conclusion of the arbitration proceedings. The appellant DDA had no opportunity of verifying those records which ultimately formed the basis of the award.

( 4 ) THE appellant s main grievance against the award is that the learned arbitrator is guilty of misconduct because, in making and publishing the award the arbitrator erroneously and illegally relied on the chartered Accountant s certificate filed after the arbitration proceedings were concluded. The appellant had no notice, chance or opportunity even to scrutinise or rebut the contents of the same. The appellant questions the fairness of the basic procedure adopted by the arbitrator.

( 5 ) IN the instant case the proceedings before the arbitrator were concluded on 12. 6. 1985. The certificate of the Chartered Accountant and the photocopy of the Muster Rolls were submitted by the claimant much after the entire arbitration proceedings were concluded.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that it is quite apparent that the arbitrator was determined to give a heavy award in favour of the respondent. He further submitted that this is clearly evident in the manner in which the arbitrator had conducted himself. The appellant requested the arbitrator for providing an opportunity to check and scrutinize the audited accounts and the original accounts of the claimants but the same were declined to him.

( 7 ) THE appellant also submitted that it is beyond comprehension as to how could a Chartered accountant give a certificate of expenditure giving details of the work, when the work did not concern his field by any stretch of imagination ? The arbitrator has seriously erred in placing so much reliance on such a certificate.

( 8 ) THE claimants were admittedly not maintaining separate accounts for the work in dispute. In that event how could such details be provided by the chartered Accountant ? It is also submitted that the certificate of the Chartered Accountant is not based on account s/audited accounts. On the contrary it is based on some information provided by the claimant. The arbitrator has seriously erred in placing reliance on such a certificate.

( 9 ) THE appellant submitted that the award suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record and the same is liable to be set aside.

( 10 ) ACCORDING to the appellant, the learned Single judg