FAO No.5585 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 5585 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.02.2011 Executive Engineer ...Appellant Versus The Bai Adarsh Co-Operative Labour and Construction Society, Ltd. and another .....Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. D.D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for respondent No.1. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 10.3.2009 passed by the learned court below whereby the objections filed by the appellant against the award of the Arbitrator, were dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that parties entered into a contract to de-silt the channel to the tune of 81,042 cubic meters. After the work was completed by the respondent, finding certain defects in the work carried out by him, he was directed to remove the defects. After completing the work, the Contractor raised the dispute. The Arbitrator awarded additional sum to the Contractor for removing 24,841 cubic meters of silt whereas he had already been paid for removal of 77,120 cubic meters. Accordingly, award was beyond the terms of the contract. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that while calculating of the quantity of silt removed by the appellant, a deduction of 20% was made on the assumption that some of the silt was dissolved in the running water. However, the same being not correct, the Arbitrator after examining the record and the technical aspects thereof came to the conclusion that no deduction was required as the silt was accumulating and in terms thereof the contractor was paid for the actual quantity of the silt removed. There is no procedural defect in the arbitration proceedings, in the absence thereof no interference was called for. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Learned court below while appreciating the FAO No.5585 of 2009 2 award of the Arbitrator has recorded that the Arbitrator who is an Engineer himself, examined the technicalities of the matter regarding accumulation of silt in the bed of the channel and the removal thereof by the contractor and directed for payment of actual quantity of silt removed by him. The merits of such an award were rightly not disturbed by the learned court below. ` This court against the order passed by the learned court below dismissing the objections cannot go into the merits of the award as no allegations of mala fide or the award being against the terms of the agreement have been raised. For the reasons mentioned above, the present appeal is dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 07.02.2011 sharmila