BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

1. Through this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said Act’), the petitioner is seeking the setting aside of the Award dated 11.10.2006 made by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of Sh. K. K. Madan (Presiding Arbitrator), Lt. Gen. A. K. Puri (retired) and Justice A. B. Rohtagi (Retired) in the matter of arbitration for the work of widening of four lane and rehabilitation of existing two lane carriageway of NH-4, Pune-Satara stretch from Satara (Km 725) to Wathar (Km 760), Package-I. The respondent herein had preferred six claims. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal in respect of the claim Nos. 1-5.

2. As indicated in the impugned Award a contract bearing agreement No. NHAI/13011/17/97-P1/182 dated 10.05.2001 had been entered into between the petitioner and the respondent for the execution of the work of widening the existing two lane highway to four lanes as well as rehabilitation of the existing two lane carriageway of National Highway-4 in the Pune-Satara stretch. The contract was in respect of the portion of the road between Satara (Km 725) and Wathar (Km 760) which, in other words, implied a stretch of 35 Km. The contract value was Rs 95,97,02,707/-. It may be pointed out that initially the contract was between the National Highway Authority of India (employer) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NHAI‘) and M/s Skanska Cementation India Limited (contractor), whose name was subsequently changed to the present name — ITD Cementation India Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘ITD Cementation‘).

3. The scope of the works involved the widening of the existing two lane stretch of 35 km between Pune-Satara, constructing new bridges and flyovers, widening and repairing existing bridges, constructing toll plaza, junctions and intersections including service roads and all road appurtenances and miscellaneous works. The date of commencement of the work was agreed to be 01.07.2001 and the date of completion, as per the contract, was 31.12.2003, which meant a period of 30 months for completing the work. The work was actually completed on 30.03.2004, that is, in 33 months. Disputes had arisen between the parties and, therefore, the respondent/ claimant invoked arbitration by its letter dated 29.06.2004 and simultaneously nominated Justice A. B. Rohtagi (retired) as an arbitrator. In response to the said invocation of the arbitration clause, the petitioner nominated Mr A. K. Puri as an arbitrator and the two arbitrators appointed Mr K. K. Madan as the Presiding Arbitrator. The following claims were made by the respondent / claimant:-

(1) Claim No.1: Amounts payable by NHAI for varied work done by claimant (ITD Cementation) and payment due under price adjustment on the basis of rebate offered in the tender. The modified claim under claim No.1 was of Rs 9,14,71,312/-. As against this, the Arbitral Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs 2,34,23,656/-.

(2) Claim No. 2: Payment due on account of redesigning of pavement layers. This claim was split into four parts being claim Nos. 2(a), (b), (c) and (d). Claim No. 2(a) related to the effect of deletion of CTSG (cement treated sub-grade). The amount awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal was a sum of Rs 41,57,025/- in respect of the claim 2(a) as against a modified claim of Rs 1,05,49,494/-. Claim No. 2(b) was in respect of the effect of deletion of CTUSB (cement treated upper sub-base). The Arbitral Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs 32,73,618/- under this head as against the modified claim of Rs 1,27,49,618/-. Claim No. 2(c), which pertained to under utilization of key plants and equipments and quarry infrastructure was withdrawn by the NHAI by their letter dated 29.03.2006. Claim 2(d) pertained to additional cost of borrow material. The Arbitral Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs 51,41,202/- to the claimant (ITD Cementation) on account of additional cost incurred towards a