This original petition is filed to set aside the award dated 29.07.2014 to the extent dismissing the petitioner's claim towards augmentation charges, compensation sought and exclusivity claimed under the terms of the agreement between the parties and also against the award of interest at 15% per annum.

2. The first respondent in the above Arbitration O.P. viz., Kamarajar Port Trust filed A.No.3726 of 2015 for a direction to the respondent in this application who is the petitioner in the main arbitration O.P. to deposit an amount of Rs.88,68,00,000/-in an interest bearing non-lien bank account.

3. Facts of the case are as follows:-

During the month of October 2002, the first respondent invited tenders for the purposes of setting up a common user coal terminal with all backup facilities and equipment on a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) basis for a period of 30 years. A consortium comprising of the South India Corporation Limited (SIC), Portia Management Services Management Limited (PMSL), Navayuga Engineering Limited (NEL) participated jointly in the tendering process for the coal terminal amongst other bidders. The bid of the above said consortium was duly accepted by the first respondent and thus, the consortium emerged as a successful highest bidder on the basis of its offer of a revenue share of 52.524%. Thus, the consortium was selected to develop the coal handling facility at Ennore Port on a Build-Operate-Transfer basis for a period of 30 years. Consequently, the consortium floated a special purpose vehicle under the name and style of "Chettinad International Coal Terminal Private Limited" which is the petitioner herein for the purpose of executing the project. Thereafter, the petitioner and the first respondent entered into the License Agreement on 14.09.2006. The said Agreement provides for the grant of license to the petitioner for the purpose of design, engineer, finance, construct, operate, maintain, market and transfer a common user coal terminal on BOT basis with all backup facilities and equipment. The petitioner prepared and submitted the detailed project report and the same was approved by an independent Engineer as contemplated under clause 6 of Part I of the Agreement. The zero date was fixed as 06.02.2008. As per the agreement, the construction of the project was to be completed and to the commercial operations were to be started by 05.08.2010. However, due to breach of assurances and promises made by the first respondent, the project could not be completed and commercial operations could not be started within the scheduled date. However, the project was completed later and the same was reported on 10.02.2011. Due certification was provided on 15.03.2011 with effect from 11.03.2011. The first respondent sought to levy liquidated damages amounting to Rs.1,31,03,640/-for the alleged delay of 36 days in completing the project. The petitioner raised objections which ultimately resulted in Arbitral proceedings.

4. The main issue of contention between the parties to the arbitration is with regard to the cost relating to the equipment/machinery brought in for the maintenance and augmentation of the terminal. This cost is sought to be exempted from the Revenue share payable to the first respondent by the petitioner. The first respondent contended that the claimant having upgraded the terminal to 8 MTPA could not claim that the same amounted to augmentation and that clause 15.1.4 would only operate where the augmentation is achieved after commissioning.

5. In fact, before the initiation of Arbitral proceedings, the parties consented to the constitution of an Expert Committee in accordance with clause 24.1 of Part I of the agreement to settle their disputes. However, there was no settlement arrived at between the parties before the Expert Committee. Consequently, the present arbitration proceedings came to be commenced by invoking clause 24.2 of Part I of the agreement. 14 issues were framed to be dealt in the said