( 1 ) BY this first appeal, the appellant, the Principal College of Vocational Studies, seeks to challenge the judgment dated May 31, 1985 passed by the learned Single Judge in suit No. 1540-A of 1983, whereby the award dated October 10, 1983 has been made a Rule of the Court and decree in terms of the Award has been passed.

( 2 ) BY an agreement dated May 2, 1978 entered into between the appellant and M/s. S. S. Jaitely, Engineers and Contractors (hereinafter referred to as the Contractor), the contractor agreed to construct the building of the college of vocational studies at Sheikh Sahai, Phase II, New Delhi on the terms and conditions contained therein. Under the terms and conditions of the agreement, the work was to commence w. e. f. April 25, 1978. The total value of the work awarded to the contractor by the appellant was Rs. 18,68,160. 00. The work was to be completed by August 24,1979. Clause No. 31 of the agreement is a clause for extension of time. Clause 50 relates to the price escalation. Clause 45 of the Contract is an arbitration clause with the stipulation that in case, the claim in dispute is Rs. 50,000. 00 or above, then the arbitrator shall give reasons for his award.

( 3 ) FROM the facts on the file it appears that the Contractor commenced the work with effect from April 25, 1978. However, by ) a letter dated July 24, 1978, the Contractor made a grievance to the appellant that first and second running bills were still pending and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, the Contractor was to be paid on 4th of every month and that by this time three bills should have been paid. However, the Contractor by his letter dated July 29,1978 withdrew his earlier letter dated July 24, 1978. By his letter dated November 25, 1978, the Contractor assured the appellant that the Contractor would be able to finish the work of the college building before the stipulated time. Again the Contractor vide letter dated April 7, 1979 made various grievances to the appellant to the effect that the regular bills were not being paid to the Contractor by the appellant for the work done. In this regard the Contractor made the mention that though the work was commenced on April 25, 1978 and the Contractor submitted the bills in time but the payments were made after four months, i. e. in October and November, 1978. The Contractor for the first time complained in this letter that the sanctioned drawings were made available to the Contractor for the first time on August 6,1978 and that it was only in October, 1978 and on January 15, 1979 that the first and second instalments of the architectural and structural drawings were made available. The appellant vide his letter dated April 9,1979 refuted the allegations of the Contractor as contained in his letter dated ^ April 7, 1979. The appellant in reply stated that the drawings fully sanctioned were made available to the Contractor by the Architects absolutely in time and even before the Contractor prepared the time schedule. Regarding the payments, the appellant stated in his reply that the payments had been made to the Contractor absolutely in time as and when bills were received in the College after due verification from the Architects as per the terms of the contract. However, vide letter dated April 19,1979, the Contractor withdrew his letter dated April 9, 1979.

( 4 ) HOWEVER, a meeting to review the progress for the construction of the college was held in the office of the Principal on May 30, 1979. Amongst others the Principal, the Architect Mr. Bose and the Contractor Mr. S. S. Jaitely were present. In this meeting the period of completion of the work was extended up to December 31, 1979. The Contractor also assured that he would from then onward increase the labour force skilled and unskilled. Except for penalty clause the Contractor agreed to the decision taken in i this meeting. Vide letter dated November 17, 1979 the Contractor cancelled the Agr