JUDGMENT :

BORANA, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by the Commercial Court No.2, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Court below’) in Civil Misc. Case No.21/2022 (NCV No.31/2020) whereby the objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’) preferred by the appellants against the award dated 23.05.2002 passed by learned Arbitrator have been rejected. Vide the award, the learned Arbitrator had proceeded on to pass an award for an amount of Rs.3,12,010/-in favour of the claimant-firm with past and pendente lite interest from 01.08.1995 to 23.05.2002 on claim Nos.2, 6, 7 & 8. The rate of interest as awarded was @ 15% per annum from 01.08.1995 till 31.03.1998 and @ 12% per annum from 01.04.1998 till the date of award. Future interest has been granted w.e.f. 16.08.2002 @ 12% per annum. Counter-claim qua cost of arbitration as preferred by the non-applicants was rejected.

2. The facts of the case are as under:

(A) Agreement No.CEAZ/UTL/06 of 90-91 was entered into between appellant no.3 and respondent no.1 firm for “Provision of work services for CGA Complex, Air Force, Uttarlai”. The stipulated date for commencement of work was 11.06.1990 and for completion of work was 10.12.1990 for Phase-I and 10.10.1991 for Phase-II. However, the same was extended up to 31.08.1992 for Phase-I and 29.10.1994 for Phase-II which was also the actual date of completion. On 06.12.1994, respondent no.1 submitted the final bill under protest. On 30.03.1996, appellants made full and final payment of the said bill.

(B) The firm vide letter/notice dated 14.10.1996 invoked arbitration clause i.e., clause 70 of the agreement for adjudication of disputes. The firm raised and annexed therewith two Appendixes of disputes/claims “A” & “B” and prayed for reference of the same to arbitration. However, the disputes/claims as raised vide Appendix-A were only referred to arbitration by the Department. Therefore, in the circumstances, the firm preferred an application under Section 11 of the Act of 1996 before the Designated Authority for reference of the disputes/claims as raised vide Appendix-B also to arbitration. The said application as preferred by the firm went up till the stage of Division Bench of the High Court and ultimately, the disputes/claims raised vide Appendix-B were also referred to the same Arbitrator.

(C) However, meanwhile, the first Arbitrator as appointed retired and second resigned and therefore, third Arbitrator entered into reference and passed the impugned award. It is also relevant to note that during pendency of the proceedings qua the disputes/claims of Appendix-B before the High Court, the Arbitrator continued with the proceedings qua the disputes/claims raised vide Appendix-A and even passed the award dated 23.05.2002 qua the said disputes/claims. It is this award dated 23.05.2002, which is in question in the present appeal.

(D) Against award dated 23.05.2002, Union of India preferred objections under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 which were dismissed vide order dated 03.02.2023 of the Commercial Court No.2, Jodhpur, against which the present appeal has been preferred.

3. Before the learned Arbitrator, ten claims in all were raised by the applicant-firm. A counter-claim for an amount of Rs.30,000/-was raised by the appellants qua the cost of reference. Learned Arbitrator proceeded on to decide claim no.2(a), 4, 6(a), 7, 8 and 9 in favour of the applicant-firm and consequently, passed the award in favour of applicant-firm. The counter-claim as preferred by the Union of India was rejected.

4. A brief detail of the claims as raised and the amount as awarded, is reproduced herein: