CHAUDHRY J.

(1) THE petitioner entered into a contract with Delhi Development Authority, respondent No. 1 for the execution of the work of ghs for 784 MIG, 784 LIG and 392 Janta with internal development of 25. 66 Hec. of land in Dilshad Garden SH Constn. 108 MIG, 108 LIG and 54 Janta Houses including W/s and S. I. Group b, and a proper agreement bearing No. 3/hdxix/76-77 was executed between the parties. The agreement contained an arbitration clause No. 25 according to which all matters in dispute were required to be adjudicated upon by an Arbitrator to be appointed by the engineer Member, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi.

(2) CERTAIN disputes arose between the parties and those were referred to the Engineer Member, Delhi Development Authority. Shri Banarsi Dass, Superintending Engineer was appointed as Arbitrator by the Engineer Member vide letter No. EM 2 (47) 81/arbn. /1218-22 dated 6. 3. 1982. The Arbitrator entered upon the reference and conducted the arbitration proceeding. The Arbitrator made and published his award on 28. 5. 1985.

(3) THE petitioner filed this petition (S. No. 1140-A/1985) under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act for direction to the Arbitrator for filing the original award with all its depositions and documents. In pursuance of the directions issued by this court the Arbitrator filed original award along with the depositions and documents which were taken and proved before the Arbitrator.

(4) NOTICE of the filing of the award was given to the parties. The petitioner did not file objections to the award. However, the Delhi Development Authority filed objections under Section 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act which is the subject matter of I. A. No. 5922/1985. The petitioner has filed reply to this application controverting all the allegations made on behalf of the Delhi Development Authority. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed:-

1. Whether the award is liable to be set aside on the objections of respondent No. 1, D. D. A. 2. Relief.

The parties led their evidence by way of affidavits.

(5) MY findings on the above issues are as under:-

Issues No. 1 and 2: The award has been assailed on the ground that the learned Arbitrator acted illegally and committed material irregularity in disallowing the claim of the respondent (D. D. A.) under counterclaims, under the head of clauses (iv), (v), (vi), (ix), (x) and (xi). It is contended that the Arbitrator erred in holding that the designs and drawings were not given to the claimant in proper time; that there was no delay on the part of the respondent in the issue of stipulated material and supply of the materials was never stopped and sufficient quantity of material was always found lying in balance in the stores of the contractor. It is stated that the learned Arbitrator ignored the entire material placed on record which was sufficient to prove that there were no lapses on the part of the respondents.

(6) I have perused the award and the objections raised on behalf of the Delhi Development Authority. The objections touch the award purely on merits on the ground that the Arbitrator has reached a wrong conclusion and he has failed to appreciate the facts and evidence proved on the record.

(7) IT is settled law that it is not open to a court to set aside a finding of fact arrived at by the Arbitrator. In M/s. Hindustan Tea Co. v. M/s. K. Shashi Kant and Co. and another1; It was observed as under:-

"under the law the Arbitrator is made the final arbiter of the dispute between the parties. The award is not open to challenge on the ground that the Arbitrator has reached a wrong conclusion or has failed to appreciate the facts. "

From the dictum of the Supreme Court it follows that the award cannot be assailed on the ground that the Arbitrator has reached a wrong conclusion and he has failed to appreciate the facts and evidence proved on the record. The objections touch the award purely on merits and cannot be gone into by this court in these proceedings. The objections are without merit and deserve dismissal. I order accordingly.

(8) I direct the award to be made a Rule of the court and decree be drawn up in terms of the award. The parties are left to bear their own costs.

(9) TWO months time is granted to the parties to make the payments. In case payments are not made within 2 months the amounts due from them shall carry an interest 12% per annum from the date of the decree till realisation. The petition and I. A. are disposed of accordingly.