The court upheld the findings of the learned Arbitrator, emphasizing the importance of compliance with contractual obligations and the interpretation of the Work Order in reaching its decision.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. - The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter, the Act] has been filed by M/s. CEC-CICI Joint Venture [hereinafter, JV] seeking setting aside of the Award dated 21st June, 20211 [No. KV/MAA/397(B) (corrected on 16th July, 2021)] [hereinafter, Impugned Award], partly allowing claims in favour of M/s. Grim-Tech Projects India Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter, Grim-Tech] and rejecting all the counter-claims. Grim-Tech is referred to as Claimant and JV as Counter-claimant / Respondent in arbitration.

BRIEF FACTS

2. JV sub-contracted work in favour of Grim-Tech vide Work Order [Work Order No. J6110RMD0132] dated 02nd January, 2013 [hereinafter, Work Order]. The description of the work given at para 5 of the Petition, is reproduced hereinbelow: -

"5.1. That the Petitioner was awarded Work of Design and Construction of Tunnel by Shield TBM, Tunnel by Cut & Cover, Underground Metro Station at Azadpur by Cut & Cover method and Ramps at Mukundpur and Shalimar Bagh for underground works on Mukundpur - Yamuna Vihar Corridor of Delhi MRTS Project of Phase III.

5.2. That the Tunnelling Work, for up and down lines, from Azadpur to Shalimar Bash (i.e. the South end) and from Azadpur to Mukundpur (i.e. the North end) were to be undertaken by the Petitioner by deploying two Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs). The TBMs (for up and down lines) was required to enter the TBM launching shafts excavated to a depth of approx. 29 meters at South end of the proposed Azadpur Metro Station and exit from the Shalimar Bagh end. Thereafter, the TBMs were to be deployed at the TBM launching shaft excavated to a depth of approx. 29 meters excavated at the North end of the proposed Azadpur Metro Station and exit from the Mukundpur end.

5.3. To prevent collapsing of the Earth during excavation of the said shafts at South and North ends and to prevent ingress of Water in the said Launching Shafts, it was decided to provide Secant Piles in the North Shaft and the South Shaft as soil retaining Structures. The Secant Piles were to be cast in-situ and were to form a part of the permanent Works. Construction works of cast in-situ Secant Pile at Azadpur Station Box Area for DMRC CC 04 Project Site were sub contracted to the Respondent (Claimant in the Arbitration proceedings) under Work Order No.: J6110RMD0132 dated 02.01.2013 for INR 4,20,44,155/-."

3. Disputes arose between the parties in relation to the above-noted Work Order. Grim-Tech claimed that the 7th and 8th RA Bills were unpaid and JV, on the other hand, contended that there were defects in the work executed for which remedial measures had to be undertaken through a third-party, at the costs and risk of Grim-Tech. This led to disputes being referred to arbitration.

4. Grim-Tech raised following claims [Reproduced from Para 11 at Page Nos. 18 and 19 of the Petition]: -

"(i) Claim No.1

For INR Rs. 1,46,26,099/- on account of Balance payment of pre-final bill/final bill and release of retention money alleged to be illegally retained by the Petitioner herein. The said claim comprised of two components namely:

a) Balance payment of work done amounting to INR 1,26,26,099/-, which was later on revised downwards to - Rs. 1,02,23,352/- by the Respondent itself after wrongly interpreting the amount as allegedly admitted by the Petitioner to be due, when such was not the case at all, and

b) Release of Retention Money (RM) amounting to INR 20,00,000/-, which was again revised downwards on its own by the Respondent to Rs. 16,14,971/- later allegedly on the basis of Petitioners submissions dated 31.08.2018 when such was not the case at all.

(ii) Claim No.2

Claim on account of quantities deviated from the agreed quantities amounting to INR 6,05,973/-

(iii) Claim No.3

Claim on account of loss of overheads and profit and losses and damages due to breach of the Petitioner (Respondent in the Arbitration proceedings) herein amounting INR 10,00,000/-, later reduced by the Respon