IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.7 OF 2009 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.438 OF 2007 M/s.Saloja & Sons. ..Appellant Vs Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents ......... Mr.Rajiv Kumar i/b.Ms.Shilpa Kapil, for appellant. Mr.Suresh Kumar, for respondent. ......... CORAM : J.N. PATEL & SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. DATE : 20TH JULY, 2009 P.C. : 1] This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Arbitration Petition No.448 of 2007. The only contentions raised before us is that the appellants were not offered right of hearing by the learned Arbitral Tribunal. The appellant is a railway contractor who had made claims against the respondents for the work allegedly done by him. The Arbitral Tribunal found that the work was not done at all and there were some false entries made by one Mr.J.R.Nagpal, Pathway Inspector (Officer of the respondent) in the measurement book and dismissed the claim. The order of the Arbitral Tribunal was challenged before the learned Single Judge by filing Arbitration Petition No.438 of 2007. The learned Single Judge by the order dated 17 th June, 2008 concurred with the findings of the Tribunal and dismissed the petition. 2] The only contention raised before us is that the appellant was denied opportunity of hearing by the Arbitral Tribunal by not furnishing him with a copy of the charge sheet filed by the respondents against Mr.Nagpal alleging that he Mr.Nagpal had made false entries in the measurement book. The appellant contends that this caused great prejudice to him in establishing his claim before the Arbitral Tribunal and therefore the Award deserves to be quashed and set aside. 3] We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant, who has placed reliance on a decision in the case of Pushpa P. Mulchandani & ors. Vs. Admiral R. Tahilani (Appeal No.581 of 2001 in Arbitration Petition No.432 of 1998) dated 4 th October, 2007 where the Court held that Section 24(3) casts duty on the Arbitrator to communicate to the parties any expert’s report or documentary report on which Arbitral Tribunal proposes to rely otherwise it may result in depriving the parties of the opportunity of hearing. 4] We have gone through the report of the Arbitrator and the proceedings placed before us. We find that the entries in the measurement book were well within the knowledge of the appellant. Therefore, no prejudice has been caused to the appellant. We do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (Smt.R.P. SondurBaldota, J.) ( J.N. Patel, J.)