The court upheld the arbitral award, emphasizing limited grounds for interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, focusing on patent illegality and burden of proof established through admissions.

JUDGMENT :

(Vikas Budhwar, J.)

1. This is an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) against the order dated 5.7.2021 passed by the Presiding Officer, Commercial Court, Gautam Budh Nagar in Arbitration Case No.110 of 2018 (Gaursons Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. Akash Engineers and Contractors) whereby the application preferred by the appellant-objector under Section 34 of the Act for setting aside the award dated 15.6.2018 of the Sole Arbitrator was rejected.

2. The case projected by the claimant-respondent before the sole Arbitrator is that it claims to be a sole proprietorship firm by the name and style of Akash Engineers and Contractors having its office at L-303, Rail Vihar, Alpha-Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. According to the claimant-respondent the appellant-objector, Gaursons Promoters Pvt. Ltd. which is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 engaged in the constructions of commercial and residential project in an around the National Capital Region ( In short N.C.R.) approached the claimant-respondent sometime in the year 2011-12 with relation to the advertised projects namely G.E.C. Capital-10 at Gaur City-2, Sector 16-C, Greater Noida for the construction of residential township.

3. It is also the case of the claimant-respondent that the claimant-respondent executed various works entrusted to it by the appellant-objector and in the year 2012-13 certain issues arose in respect of the project of the appellant-objector due to agitation by the villagers, erstwhile land owners which entailed a situation whereby the work was stalled.

4. The claimant-respondent further asserts in the claim petition that earlier it was granted work for block A, K, Extended Basement, F & G and G.C.-5 at Gaur City, Sector-4, Noida by one of the sister concern of the appellant-objector being Gaursons Hi-tech Infrastructures (P) Ltd. As the work of the claimant-respondent is stated to be upto the mark and satisfaction so the appellant-objector approached the claimant and requested it to execute balance work of Block C and D. In this regard two work orders were issued namely:-(a) work order no. GPPL/GC 10/CIV-C/260/13 (work order no.1) dated 1.11.2013 for INR.2,38,26,296.00 (b) Work Order No.GPPL/GC 10/CIV-D/261/13 (Work Order no.2) dated 1.11.2013 of INR.2,49,18,861.00.

5. As per the pleadings set forth in the claim petition filed before the sole Arbitrator the work assigned to the claimant was as under:-

Work Order no.1

Work Order no.2