Arbitrator should have passed award by a speaking order.

N. Kannadasan, J.

The appellant in OSA No.201 of 1998 was awarded a contract by the first respondent and the contract agreement provides a period of 36 months to complete the work from the date of handing over the site. The ranks of the parties are given as set out in OSA No.201 of 1998 for convenience. Even though the site was handed over to the appellant/contractor on 1.6.1979, the work was not completed within the stipulated period. It is contended by the appellant that they could not complete the work due to the default on the part of the first respondent and due to the delay on the part of the first respondent on several counts, the appellant suffered a huge loss. In view of the delay on the part of the first respondent, the appellant was constrained to seek extension of time to complete the contract and the period was extended from time to time. Under the said circumstances, the appellant has invoked the arbitration clause. The Arbitrators, after considering the various records and documents made available before them and after giving opportunity to examine the witnesses and after hearing the arguments and submissions of both the parties, have passed an award accepting the claim of the appellant with the respect to the claim Nos.(a),(b),(c),(d) and (e) and quantified the amount therein payable by the first respondent at Rs.2,01,13,914.00 with interest at 11% from 22.11.1989 till the date of payment or decree whichever is earlier. Even though a counter-claim was made as against the appellant herein by the first respondent, the same was rejected by the Arbitrators. The first respondent has filed a petition in O.P.No.368 of 1994 to set aside the award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act and the Arbitrators have filed a petition in O.P.No.715 of 1993 under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, seeking permission to file the award dated 29.3.1993 before the Court. The learned Judge by a common order dated 30.4.1998 has set aside the award in respect of four claims viz., claim Nos.(a),(b),(c) and (e) but upheld the award in respect of claim No.(d), but however, restricted the period for which the interest is payable as from the date of the award till the date of payment. Aggrieved against the said order of the learned Judge, the appellant filed OSA No.201 of 1998 as against O.P.No.368 of 1994 and the first respondent filed two appeals in OSA Nos.107 and 108 of 1999 against O.P.Nos.715 of 1993 and 368 of 1994 respectively.

3. The learned Senior Counsel Mr.K.Ramachandran appearing for the appellant contended that inasmuch as the award passed by the Arbitrators is a non-speaking award and there are no errors apparent on the face of the award or documents accompanying it, the same should not have been set aside either in part or in full. In this connection, the learned Senior Counsel cited various decisions of the Supreme Court to the effect that the Courts have no powers to interfere with a non-speaking award. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that the learned Judge has erroneously proceeded with the matter that the Arbitrators have exceeded their jurisdiction even though they have acted within the terms of Arbitration Clause. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that inasmuch as the learned Judge has overlooked the fact that the Arbitrators have chosen one out of the two possible views and as such, their decision ought not to have been set aside as erroneous. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that inasmuch as the Supreme Court has remitted the matter for fresh consideration and discretion is left to the Arbitrators to decide the arbitrability of the issues involved and accordingly when the Arbitrators have decided that the issues involved therein are arbitrable and passed an award, the same ought to have been accepted, unless contrary is proved. He further argued with regard to the nature of the claim made and the loss suffered by the contractor/appellant and contended that the