FAO No. 425 of 2010 (O&M) 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on July 30,2010. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and another --Appellants vs. M/s J.K..Danewalia Rice Mills Jawaharko and others -- Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.C.S.Bakshi,Advocate,for the applicants/appellants Mr.Mukand Gupta,Advocate,for respondent No.1 (i) to (iv) Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, Challenge in this judgment is to the order passed by the Addl.District Judge, Chandigarh, dated 07.4.2009, by which objections filed by the applicants/appellants under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short,the Act), for setting aside the arbitral award dated 16.1.2004, have been dismissed Parties to the lis entered into an agreement dated 15.10.1998 for custom milling of 68506 bags of paddy Grade A variety weighing 44528-90-000 quintals and the last delivery of the rice was agreed to be made on 31.12.1998. Grievance of the applicants/appellants is that the respondents did not deliver the rice in time and also did not make the payment against the value of the gunny bags, sales tax and TDS. Consequently a dispute arose between the parties which was referred to the Arbitrator by the appellants. Before the Arbitrator, statement of account was submitted by the appellant, according to which, the respondents were found entitled to a FAO No. 425 of 2010 (O&M) 2 sum of Rs.1,54,063/-.The Arbitrator, awarded the said amount alongwith transportation charges of Rs.41,786/- and costs of excess rice as Rs. 757.55 total amounting to Rs.1,96.606.55 without interest. Learned Court below had also found that award of the Arbitrator is speaking, being well reasoned. Nothing was found remiss on the part of the Arbitrator which could attract the provisions of Section 34 of the Act and as such, the objections were dismissed. In the present appeal, only argument raised by the learned counsel for the applicants/appellants is that the appellants' were the claimants before the Arbitrator, yet award is in favour of the respondents. In this regard, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that during the course of proceedings before the Arbitrator, the applicants/appellants themselves submitted the revised statement of accounts, according to which, the amount recoverale from the respondents was Rs.5,82,881/-and the amount payable by the applicants/appellants to the respondents was Rs. 7,36,944/-. Therefore, the Arbitrator had found that the appellants were liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,54,063/- to the respondents, rather to claim anything from them. Since substantial justice has been done by the Arbitrator between the parties on the basis of statement of accounts furnished by the applicants/appellants themselves, I do not find any error either in the Arbitral award or in the order of the Court below. Hence, the present appeal is found to be devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. July 30,2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge FAO No. 425 of 2010 (O&M) 3