AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner has filed this petition against the award
dated 12.09.2003 passed by the M.P. Arbitration Tribunal
Bhopal in reference case No. 60/2000.
The respondent made a reference under Section 7 of
the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983
(hereinafter called "Act of 1983) claiming an amount of Rs.
17,32,000/- as amount due against the respondent on
account of contract awarded in favour of the respondent.
The respondent was awarded a contract to prepare
concept plan layout for the scheme named as M.P. Rajya
Karmachari Avas Yojana. An agreement was executed in
this regard on 30.04.1998. In accordance with the
agreement, the respondent had to perform following work.
i) Architectural Work and site Development.
ii) Structural Engineering Work.
iii) Sanitary, Plumbing, drainage, water supply and sewerage work;
iv) Electrical Work; and
v) Landscape work for which complete planning and working out of details were required to be carried out.
The respondent pleaded that it had performed the
work upto the stage 5 and submitted bills of Rs.
17,82,000/-, however, the petitioner rejected the drawing,
designs and estimates submitted by the respondent.
The tribunal after appreciation of evidence has held
that the respondent failed to adduce any material to show
that he completed work of stage 2 to 5. The findings of the
tribunal are based on proper appreciation of evidence
thereafter, the tribunal has held that the respondent had
completed the work of state first and as per the agreement
he was entitled to receive an amount of Rs. 3,56,000/-.
The petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 50,000/-, hence,
the respondent is eligible to get an amount of Rs.
3,06,400/- with security deposit of Rs. 2500/-. In our
opinion, the findings recorded by the tribunal are based on
proper appreciation of evidence. There is no illegality in
the findings recorded by the tribunal. The contract was a
work contact and the tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain
the dispute.
Consequently, we do not find any merit in this civil
revision, it is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.