FAO (OS) No.352/2001 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) No.352/2001 Reserved on : April 15, 2009 Pronounced on: April 17, 2009 M/s ANANT RAJ AGENCIES … Appellant Through : None. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes % JUDGMENT VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. 1. This appeal is connected with the appeal FAO (OS) No.207/2001. The appeal 207/2001 was on behalf of the DDA with respect to the challenge to rejection of two of its objections and the non-interference with FAO (OS) No.352/2001 Page 2 respect to the findings of the arbitrator by the learned Single Judge. We have already dismissed the connected appeal of the DDA which arises from the same judgment and a portion of which is challenged by the appellant M/s Anant Raj Agencies in the present appeal. 2. The present appeal is filed challenging the limited issue with regard to the decision of the learned Single Judge with respect to rejection of its claim No.5 which pertained to claim with regard to straightening bent up bar issued in coils and bent up bundles. 3. The learned Single Judge with respect to this claim No.5 has set aside the finding of the arbitrator by following his earlier judgment in M/s Wee Aar Constructive Builders Vs. DDA, Suit No. 2456/A/1996 decided on 14.3.2001 (now reported as 2001 (2) Arb LR 71 : 2001 (4) AD (Delhi) 65). The learned Single Judge in the case of M/s Wee Aar Constructive Builders has held that the clause in question, namely clause 3.13 of the contract, was capable of only one interpretation that the item with regard to reinforcement for RCC work including binding, bending and placing in position complete (a) mild steel and medium tensile steel bars (b) cold twisted bars is a description of the work to be done by the contractor and being inclusive and illustrative will encompass ancillary works and intrinsically connected work FAO (OS) No.352/2001 Page 3 such as strengthening and cutting the steel bars. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge modified the award and rejected the claim No.5 as originally allowed by the arbitrator. 4. We find that the reasoning of the learned Single Judge as given in the case of M/s Wee Aar Constructive Builders Vs. DDA is unexceptionable. Surely, an item of work by description has to include all items which are ancillary and intrinsically connected with the item of work. Also, the decision in the case of M/s Wee Aar Constructive Builders was followed by a Single Judge of this court in Narain Das Vs. DDA, 126 (2006) DLT 10. A Division Bench of this court of which one of us (Mukul Mudgal, J.) was a member in a recent judgment dated 1.4.2009 in FAO(OS) 121/2006, titled as Pt. Munshi Ram & Associates (P) Ltd. Vs. DDA has upheld the view in Narain Das’s case. We are thus bound by the judgment of the Division Bench in Pt. Munshi Ram’s case. 5. As in the connected appeal where there was no appearance on behalf of the DDA, in the present appeal also there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant, M/s Anant Raj Agencies. As noted in the order disposing of the connected appeal, the amounts under the award and as duly modified by the orders of the learned Single Judge have been paid by the DDA to M/s FAO (OS) No.352/2001 Page 4 Anant Raj Agencies. 6. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed, without any order as to costs. VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J MUKUL MUDGAL, J April 17, 2009 ib