pvr 1 ap387-07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.387 OF 2007 Union of India. ...Petitioner vs. M/s.Sagar Constructions. ...Respondent --- Mr.S.R.Rajguru, for Petitioner. Ms.Shilpa Kapil, for Respondent. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. DATED: 11th November,2011. P.C.:- 1. By this petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Union of India challenges the Award made by the sole Arbitrator. The arbitration was invoked by the contractor. The learned Arbitrator by his Award has awarded only claim nos. 1, 5 and 7 in favour of the Contractor. By the Award made against claim no.1 he directed the Union of India to pay Rs.1,24,345/- to pvr 2 ap387-07 the Contractor. By the Award made against Claim no.5, the Arbitrator has directed the Union of India to pay an amount of Rs.24,324.30 to the Contractor, and by the Award made against claim no.7 he has directed payment of Rs.1,25,500/- to the contractor. All other claims made by the contractor have been rejected. The learned Arbitrator has also decreed the counter claim made by the Union of India in favour of Union of India. The counterclaim made by the Union of India initially for an amount of Rs.4,97,455.65. That claim was brought down by the Union of India to Rs. 2,83,709.53. The learned Arbitrator has awarded to the Union of India an amount of Rs.52,012/- against this counterclaim. The learned Arbitrator was appointed by the Department itself. Perusal of the Award shows that the claims made on behalf of the Contractor have been awarded by the learned Arbitrator after appreciating the material on record and the Award is mainly based on the findings of facts which have been recorded by the Arbitrator. So far as reducing the claim made by the Union of India is concerned, the Union of India has claimed an amount of Rs.2,83,709.53 as against that it has been awarded an amount of Rs.52,012/-. The pvr 3 ap387-07 learned Arbitrator has given reasons for making the Award. In my opinion, for two reasons the Award cannot be interfered with viz. (i) that the findings recorded by the learned Arbitrator are the findings of facts based on appreciation of material on record and (ii) that the amounts of Award are too meager to call for the interference at the hands of this Court. The petition is, therefore, disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) ---