R. Sudhakar,J.

Original Side Appeal No.406 of 2000 is filed by the appellants/petitioners in O.P.No.908 of 1999 challenging the common order dated 24. 2000 passed by the learned single Judge, rejecting their claim for setting aside the Award dated 23. 1999 passed by the sole Arbitrator in Application No.76 of 1995 in C.S.No.263 of 1987.

2. Original Side Appeal No.407 of 2000 is filed by the appellants/respondents in A.No.1221 of 2000 in O.P.No.326 of 1999 challenging the common order of learned single Judge dated 24. 2000 allowing O.P.No.326 of 1999 to receive and confirm the award and A.No.1221 of 2000 to pass decree in terms of the Award dated 23. 1999.

3. The parties, viz., the appellants are referred to as Department and the first respondent is referred to as claimant/ contractor in both the appeals for the sake of convenience.

4. The sole Arbitrator was appointed in C.S.No.263 of 1987 and he passed an award dated 23. 1999. The Arbitrator filed O.P.No.326 of 1999 before this Court to receive and confirm the award dated 23. 1999. The first respondent, the claimant filed Application No.1221 of 2000 in the said O.P.No.326 of 1999 to pass a decree in terms of the award. The appellants herein filed O.P.No.908 of 1999 challenging the award dated 23. 1999. The learned single Judge by a common order dated 24. 2000 in both O.P.Nos.326 of 1999 and 908 of 1999 and the A.No.1221 of 2000 allowed the Application No.1221 of 2000 and O.P.No.326 of 1999 and dismissed the O.P.No.908 of 1999. It is against this common order dated 24. 2000, present appeals are filed.

5. The brief facts of the case as stated by the claimant is as follows:- The appellants floated a tender for the formation of R.C. Jetty at Valinokkam Fishing Harbour in Ramanad District. The nature of work was precasting and driving of R.C.C. Piles. The last date of receipt of tender was fixed on 30.12.1983 as per the tender schedule. The tender will be valid upto six months from 30.12.1983 to 26. 1984. During the opening of the Tender, the first respondent/claimant made the following conditions:-

.(1) Mobilisation charges of Rs.2 lakhs and Electric Power and Water Supply should be made available at the site by the Department and

.(2) Required cement and steel for the casting yard should be supplied by the Department free of cost

The first respondent/claimant submitted the lowest quote. On the request made by the Department by its letter dated 8. 1984 claimant revalidated the tender and finally, it is stated that the claimant received the work order dated 23. 1985. Since the work order was issued after lapse of 15 months, claimant sent a letter dated 23. 1985 claiming 30% escalation as against 20% claimed earlier. At the request of the Superintending Engineer that the escalation amount will be paid on receipt of formal orders from the Government, claimant/contractor accepted the contract work on 20.4.1985. After accepting the agreement in the presence of Mr.G.Kaliasundaram, the then Superintending Engineer, the claimant brought all Pile Driving Equipment and machinery and the construction materials necessary for this project work in the site. Some portion of Pile Driving machinery, were hypothecated under the hypothecation agreement with the then Superintending Engineer Mr.G.Kaliasundaram on 15. 1985 and received the recoverable mobilisation charges of Rs.2 lakhs as mentioned in the tender condition dated 30.12.1983. However, it is only on 7. 1985 that the Department handed over the site. On 7. 1985 itself casting of Pile work was started. During the casting of piles, the Department did not supply the required cement and steel and proper instructions were not given. However, the claimant has completed the casting of piles. Due to the aforesaid delay, the claimant incurred loss as the machinery and labour were kept idle. Further, 3rd appellant did not pay the full bill amount for the work done upto October, 1985 and has not prepared the escalation bill amount ac