M/S. Engineers India Ltd vs Shyam Sunder Agarwal And
2022 Latest Caselaw 1526 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                              ARBA No.11 of 2011
                             (Through hybrid mode)

            M/s. Engineers India Ltd.              ....             Appellant

                                           Mr. S.P.Mishra, Senior Advocate
                                        -versus-

            Shyam Sunder Agarwal and               ....          Respondents
            another

                                              Mr. Y.Dash, Senior Advocate

                      CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                                       ORDER

Order No.                             24.02.2022

17.         1.      Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate resumes his

argument. He draws attention to, inter alia, exhibits 2 and 5 being letter of intent dated 29th November, 1983 and agreement dated 31st December, 1983 respectively. He demonstrates that the contract was for hire of one super deluxe bus for three years and extended by another year but terminated at 47 months. All running expenses, consumables, crew wages, uniform etc. were to be borne by the contractor while his client, employer would pay Rs.21,000/- per month in all. He submits, all bills, running and final, were paid. On these terms there could not have been award of Rs.52 lakhs. It is irrelevant that the awarded sum was a deduction on claim amount.

2. On query from Court he reiterates, the documents relied upon here exhibits in reference and referred to in the award as perused by the arbitrator. He submits further, the letter of intent

// 2 //

and the agreement (exhibits 2 and 5) are outer boundaries of the contract, which can be examined by Court in a challenge under sections 30 and 33 of the 1940 Act. The inner boundaries being working of the mind behind a non-speaking award may not be probed by Court. He relies on following judgments.

(i) Associated Engineers Co. vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, reported in (1991) 4 SCC 93, paragraphs 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29.

(ii) T.N.Electricity Board vs. Brigade Tunnel Constructions, reported in (1997) 4 SCC 121, paragraphs 36, 37, 38, 39 and 40.

(iii) Rajasthan State Engineering Enterprises vs. Eastern Engineering Enterprises, reported in (1999) 9 SCC 283, paragraphs 44, 45, 46 and 47.

(iv) Food Corporation of India vs. Chandu Construction, reported in (2007) 4 SCC 697, paragraphs 8, 10, 14, 15 and 20.

4. Mr. Dash, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of respondents. He will be heard on next date.

5. List on 10th March, 2022.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge RKS