Judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act is significantly limited, focusing solely on jurisdictional errors or procedural irregularities with no reassessment of factual findings.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. PANIGRAHI, J.

1. This Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “A&C Act”) has been filed against the judgment dated 16.11.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar in Arbitration Proceeding No.183 of 2010 wherein the learned District Judge has dismissed the petition filed under Section 34 of the A&C Act thereby confirming the award dated 12.07.2010 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator in Arbitration Case No.63 of 2007.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. That, the brief facts of the case are that a tender was floated by the Central Public Works Department (hereinafter referred to as “the Department” for brevity) in the year 2004 for construction of 115 quarters for CRPF Jawans. The bid of the contractor for a sum of Rs.3,82,98,373/- was accepted. The period for execution was 22 months after calculating 22 days from the date of issue of the letter dated 28.01.2005 issued by the Department.

3. The authority of the said Department issued show cause notice on 21.04.2006 for rescinding the contract on the ground of tardy progress of work. The contractor replied on 01.12.2006. Another notice was also issued to the contractor indicating such slow progress and the contractor also submitted his reply. Ultimately, the contract was rescinded on 17.02.2006 by the employer of the contract.

4. The contractor filed his claim before the learned Arbitrator for a sum of Rs.1,96,45,817/- along with pendent elite and future interest. The Department filed the counter claim for a sum of Rs.35,80,333/- with interest.

5. Seven issues have been framed by the Learned Arbitrator and award has been passed for a sum of Rs.46,77,249/- directing for the payment of the amount to the contractor within 3 months and failure of payment of the said amount within the time frame shall carry interest @ 15% from the date of award till full realization.

6. The aforesaid award was challenged before the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 citing several grounds. After hearing the parties, the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar has been pleased to dismiss the above petition on merits.

7. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.11.2019 passed by the Learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar in Arbitration Proceeding No.183 of 2010, the Appellants prefer this appeal. However, there was a delay of 165 days in filing the ARBA. Therefore, the Appellants filed I.A. No.24 of 2020 for condonation of delay in filing the ARBA which was allowed vide this Court’s judgment and order dated 20.4.2023.

8. Now that the facts leading up to the instant Appeal has been laid down, this Court shall endeavour to summarise the contentions of the Parties and the broad grounds that have been raised to seek the exercise of this Court’s limited jurisdiction available under S. 37 of the A&C Act.

II. APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS:

9. During course of hearing, learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the contract was rescinded because of the slow and poor quality of the work. The learned Arbitrator recorded a finding that the completion of the work occurred due to laches of the Respondent, but contradicting the said findings, the learned Arbitrator also held that the Appellants contributed to the delay, too. Such contradictory findings are wholly unsustainable.

10. Furthermore, it was submitt