M. J. Rao,c. J. (Oral)

( 1 )

( 2 ) SO far as the claim relating to the levy of Rs. 5,69,473 towards compensation against the contractor is concerned, the contention of the appellant is that the Arbitrator could not have gone into the said question on merits as it was an excluded item on which the decision of the Engineer is final, and,therefore, that part of the award has to be set aside. The item relates to recovery of compensation from the contractor on account of delay.

( 3 ) IN this case the point arises in a novel fashion. The concerned engineer authorised to determine the question whether the contractor was liable to pay compensation had, in fact, decided that such compensation was payable by the contractor. That was a decision of the officer in favour of the D. D. A. This appears to be borne out by the decision contained in the officer s letter dated 20. 5. 1985 (referred to under Counter Claim No. l of the appellant/d. D. A ). There was no need for D. D. A. to ask the Arbitrator to include it in the award. But unfortunately, the D. D. A. applied before the Arbitrator to have the said amount included in the award. If the D. D. A. tried to recover it outside the award, there w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document