BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J.

( 1 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner / objector has assailed the impugned award dated 03. 01. 2001 on several counts. The first count is that claim Nos. 1 and 2 have been clubbed with Claim No. 3 and the Arbitrator has awarded a sum of Rs. 51,500. 08 under the last of these heads, i. e. , Claim No. 3. Claim No. 1 pertains to the expenditure incurred by the petitioner during the period the site was not being made available to the petitioner, i. e. , the period prior to the petitioner being able to commence the work as per the tender. Claim No. 2 pertains to the petitioner s alleged professional loss for making itself available for this project instead of undertaking some other projects whereby the petitioner could have made profits. Claim No. 3 is in respect of the loss of profit on account of the petitioner not being permitted to complete the work. In other words, Claim No. 3 is for the loss of profit on the balance work which the petitioner was not permitted to complete. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the learned Arbitrator held in favour of the petitioner under all the three claims, i. e. , Claim No. 1, Claim No. 2 and Claim

Click Here to Read the rest of this document