The court upheld the arbitral tribunal's decision that the contract mandated construction power be supplied at 400/440 V, recognizing the claimant's entitlement to additional expenses due to unmet contractual obligations.

JUDGMENT

Vibhu Bakhru, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter `the A&C Act') impugning an arbitral award dated 07.11.2007 (hereafter `the impugned award') passed by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of Shri H.C. Bharadvaj, Shri V.K. Tyagi and Shri R.S. Prasad as the Presiding Arbitrator (hereafter `the Arbitral Tribunal').

2. The impugned award has been rendered in the context of Contract No.3 under Agreement No. 04/93 dated 24.06.1993 for execution of Civil Works of Pressure Shaft and Power House Complex of Naptha Jhakri Hydroelectric Project (hereafter `the Agreement').

Factual Context:

3. The respondent, Jaiprakash Hyundai Consortium (hereafter `JHC'), is a consortium between M/s Jaiprakash Associates Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and M/s Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd, a company registered under the laws of South Korea. The consortium came into existence by an agreement dated 30.07.1992.

4. In 1992, the petitioner, (hereafter `SJVNL') invited bids for various works including civil works of pressure shafts and power house complex relating to the Naptha Jhakri Hydroelectric Project (hereafter the `Project'). JHC submitted its bid and SJVNL awarded the contract for executing the Project to JHC by a Letter of Award (hereafter `LOA') dated 26.05.1993. Thereafter, the Agreement was signed between the parties on 24.06.1993 for a total value of Rs.475.01 crores. In terms of the Agreement, the date of commencement of the Project was 01.07.1993 and JHC was expected to complete the pressure shafts within a period of fifty-seven months, and the power complex within a period of sixty-three months from the date of commencement of the Project. Resultantly, the scheduled date of completion of the pressure shafts and power complex was 31.03.1998 and 30.09.1998, respectively.

5. Admittedly, disputes arose between the parties regarding SJVNL's failure to perform its obligations under the Agreement. JHC claims that in terms of Sub-clause 4.5(i) of Chapter IV of the Additional Conditions of Contract (ACC) included as an integral part of the Agreement, SJVNL was obligated to provide JHC with AC 3 phase 50 cycle, 440/400 V construction power at various work sites, colonies and offices. However, SJVNL had failed to provide the requisite construction power at 440/400 V, as contracted; therefore, JHC had to incur additional expenses for stepping down and stepping up the power for distribution and consumption at the site.

6. In view of the dispute between the parties, a meeting was held on 09.07.1993 between SJVNL and JHC wherein, SJVNL stated that it would provide 22 KV construction power at various sites while power supply at JHC's camp would be provided on Low Tension supply (LT Supply), that is, at 440/400 V. By its letter dated 03.09.1993, JHC disputed that the same was in conformity with their contract and it claimed that the relevant clauses of the Agreement imposed an obligation on SJVNL to provide construction power at 440/400 V instead of 22 KV. Subsequently, various meetings were held between the parties between the period 09.10.1993 to 12.10.1993 wherein SJVNL reiterated its stand that the construction power would be provided to JHC at 22 KV only.

7. JHC, by its letter dated 23.12.1993, communicated to SJVNL that it required construction power at 440/400 V at five points - (i) the