1 S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.227/2004 M/s. Jagdish Prasad Ramavtar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.227/2004 M/s. Jagdish Prasad Ramavtar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors Date : 19.9.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Ms.Rekha Borana, for the petitioner. Mr.Arvind Samdariya, for the respondents. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this revision petition, the contractor has challenged the order dated 8.4.2004 passed by the Court of District Judge, Sri Ganganagar in Civil Misc. Case No.121/1996 by which the application filed by the contractor under Section 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act of 1940'). According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent Union of India referred the dispute for claim of Rs.12,84,844.84. In this amount, total consolidated amount claimed on the additional expenditure for completion of incomplete work through 2 S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.227/2004 M/s. Jagdish Prasad Ramavtar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors risk and cost of the respondents, Rs.6,01,498.52 were claimed and according to learned counsel for the petitioner, that matter could not have been referred to arbitrator in view of Clause 70 of the contract which is as under :- “70. Arbitration. - All disputes between the parties to the contract (other than those for which the decision of the C.W.E. or any other person is by the Contract expressed to be final and binding) shall, after written notice by either party to the Contract to the other of them, be referred to the sole arbitration of an Engineer Officer to be appointed by the authority mentioned in the tender document......” According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the claim on account of technical examination of the work was also included in the above amount of Rs.12,84,844.84 and that also could not have been referred. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner raised objection about entertaining such claim of the respondents before the Arbitrator himself but that was not dealt with separately and the arbitrator has considered the said amount. 3 S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.227/2004 M/s. Jagdish Prasad Ramavtar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors So far as the amount of Rs.6,01,498.52 is concerned, it will be relevant to mention here that against this claim, the Arbitrator awarded Rs.5,40,057.47 only. The objection of the petitioner is that the respondents raised claim beyond the amount of Rs.6,01,498.52 by raising claim of Rs.7,12,809.68. Any party can raise any claim but the arbitrator is required to reject the claim by mentioning that that claim is not allowable. In the award, the arbitrator, therefore, mentioned what has been claimed by the Union of India and has not allowed the amount beyond Rs.6,01,498.52, therefore, the arbitrator has not awarded the amount exceeding the dispute referred. So far as the second objection of the petitioner that the claim on account of technical execution work for which Rs.23,687.29 has been claimed by the respondents could not have been entertained by the arbitrator is concerned, the arbitrator has passed the award after application of mind and considering all the facts of the case. In view of the above reasons, I do not find that the arbitrator award can be interfered for this reason that of awarding Rs.23,687.29 in a matter where large 4 S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.227/2004 M/s. Jagdish Prasad Ramavtar Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors number of disputes have been decided by the arbitrator after considering all aspects of the matter. In view of the above reasons, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order while exercising the revisional jurisdiction. Consequently, this revision petition, having no merits, is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya