The Arbitrator must give reasons for awarding damages, and some evidence has to be led by the party claiming such damages before the Arbitrator.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J.

1. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Arbitral Award dated 19.02.2018 passed by the Sole Arbitrator adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Management and Lease Deed dated 14.09.2015 executed between the parties.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner confines his challenge to a very limited aspect. He submits that the Arbitrator having held that specific performance of this Agreement cannot be granted and proper relief of respondent no. 1 shall be in form of damages, has proceeded to grant damages in favour of respondent no. 1 without there being any evidence for substantiating the same on record. He has drawn my attention to paragraph 39, 40 and 43 of the Award which are reproduced hereinbelow:-

"39. In light of my findings given above I now deal with the claims and counter claims.

Claim No.1. Seeks quashment of letter dated 03-03-2016 terminating the lease deed being illegal and void being in violation of the terms of the registered lease deed.

Claim No.2. Seeks declaration that the lease deed dated 14- 09-2015 is validly executed and is subsisting and the claimant is entitled to have free ingress and egress to the leased out area at all times.

In these claims I hold that the MLD in question remains valid and binding on the parties and unilateral cancellation of the said deed by R1CO is illegal and non est.

40. The relief sought by the claimant to have ingress and egress to the property subject matter of the MLD virtually seeks specific performance of the lease. I have carefully examined the matter and various grounds taken by the respondents in showing the deed to be void ab intio or in any case voidable and I hold this is not a fit case for grant of relief of specific performance as granting damages, it being a commercial deal, would be proper relief to the claimant.

xxxxxxx

43. Claim No.6. Seeks award of damages.

The claimant has claimed that it would have been able to sub lease the property at the rate of Rs. 85 per Sq. Ft. in case it had not been deprived of access to the property by R1CO. There is no evidence available on the record from which one could determine the quantum of damages but keeping in view that the lease was for 20 years I consider that a lump sum amount of damages should be Rs. 10/- Per Sq, Ft. per month for ten years only as it is not possible to hold that the whole property could have been sub leased in one go. The amount comes to Rs. 4,03,59,600/-.

Claim No.7. Award of interest pendent lite and future interest at the rate of 18% pa

As the claim for damages is being settled now so there is no reason to award any pendente lite interest."

3. He places reliance on the judgment of this Court in Fitness First India Private Limited (FFIPL") vs. Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Private Limited, 2019 SCC OnLine(Del) 6794 and of the Supreme Court in Kailash Nath Associates v. DDA & Anr., (2015) 4 SCC 136 to submit that for award of claim of damages, it was incumbent on respondent no. 1 to have led evidence to substantiate the said claim. He further places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Associate Builders vs. DDA, (2015) 3 SCC 49 to contend that the Award being unreasoned as far as quantification of damages is concerned, the same is liable to be set aside.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent no. 1 submits that respondent no. 1 claimed damages at the rate of Rs. 85 per sq. ft. During the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, on an appeal filed by respondent no. 1 before this Court, being ARB. A. (COMM) 45/2016 titled Total Properties Maintenance LLP v. S.S. Con Build (P) Ltd. & Ors., the petitioner, as recorded in order dated 14.03.2017 passed in the said appeal, itself had offered to deposit a sum of Rs.120 per sq.ft. in order to secure the interest of respondent no. 1. He furt