JUDGMENT :

Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.

This Arbitration Appeal filed in terms of Section 37 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1997, for short Act, is directed against the judgment dated 05.12.2020, for short impugned order, passed in the application filed under section 34 of the Act by the applicants/ appellants herein, whereby the application filed by the appellants, seeking setting aside of the Award passed by the Arbitrator, has been dismissed.

2. To understand the controversy in proper perspective the brief resume of the facts that led to the filing of this appeal, are taken note of in the first instance, thus:

3. In the year 1988, a work of construction, RCC Cut and Cover Conduit for a length of 477 meters from (-) 494 meters to RD (-) 17 meters of the Sumbal Link Channel in Upper Sindh Hydel Project USHP-II in November 1988 was allotted to the respondent contractor in terms of Chief Engineer USHP-II’s No. USHP-II/37 dated 5.11.1988.

4. The allotted work to the respondent/contractor, for execution as detailed hereinabove, got delayed due to eruption of militancy in the erstwhile State of J&K now Union Territory and the appellants offered a package of incentives viz. upward revision of rates to the contractors on 1.1.1993. The respondent/ contractor, on the basis of the offer made a claim to the Corporation seeking benefit of upward revised rates on the analogy adopted in the case of other contractors who had abandoned their works and resumed the same after April, 1993, for the work in question from 1.1.1990. The appellants have allowed the revised rates in favour of the respondent/ contractor for the 10% of work which was incomplete, as stated, from April 1993 and the claim for 90% of the allotted work which had been completed before 1.4.1993 was not admitted. The denial of the claim for revision of rates from 1.1.1990 for the work already completed formed a ground for the respondent/ contractor to approach this Court seeking reference of dispute to arbitration and this Court in terms of order dated 17.7.2012 appointed Sh Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Dar, former District & Sessions Judge as arbitrator to enter upon the reference and pass its award. The learned Arbitrator, as a consequence to the directions of this Court, entered upon the reference and after evaluation of the evidence on the issues framed, passed an Award dated 21.7.2014 in favour of respondent/ petitioner to the tune of Rs. 45,38,416/- along with interest @10% per annum from the date of filing of the petition by the petitioner/ respondent herein before this Court till the date of passing of award. The learned Arbitrator also held petitioner/ respondent herein, entitled to interest @ 18% per annum from the date of award till its final realization.

5. Aggrieved of the Award of the learned Arbitrator, the appellants filed an application under section 34 of the Act before the court of Principal District Judge, Srinagar, for short court below, seeking setting aside of the Award of the learned Arbitrator. The Court below after hearing learned counsel for the parties and after a thorough discussion dismissed the application in terms of order dated 05.12.2020, holding that none of the grounds projected in the application have been substantiated within the parameters envisaged under Section 34 of the Act.

6. The impugned order is challenged in this Arbitration Appeal inter alia on the grounds that: the order impugned is patently illegal, erroneous and against the settled position of the law on the subject having been passed against the terms and conditions of the agreement; there is total non-application of mind; the arguments advanced before it by the applicants/ appellants were not considered at all; the objections filed by the applicants/ appellants on the issue of limitation have not been addressed; the court below did not appreciate that the claim petition was an afterthought as the claim petition was filed after a gap of 17 years; the learned Arbitrator has awarded inter