( 1 ) [the petitioner entered into a contract with the D. D. A. for doing electric work at Interstate Bus Terminus at Delhi in 1970. Work was to be done in 11 months. It could not be finished due to slow progress of building work. Petitioner made 2 claims that due to rise in prices, his rates should be enhanced by 22% and that due to slow progress of building work, his labour remained idle and he should be allowed Rs 16,500. 00. The matter was referred to arbitrator who awarded enhancement of rates by 18% and awarded Rs 800. 00 for the other claim. Petitioner applied U/ss. 14 and 17 for making award rule of the Court while respondent applied U/ss. 30 and 33 for setting aside of the award. After narrating above facts, the judgement para 13 onwards is :

( 2 ) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that from the very beginning, the Delhi Development Authority had been totally denying the claim of the contractor on the ground that the enchancement claimed was extra-contractual and that, increase, if any, was permissible only under clause 10 (c) of the agreement, but that too in the event of the happening of certain contigencies. It is submitted by Shri