LAW FOR ALL

Arbitration disputes - only point for appeal is that The Division Bench, by the order under appeal dated 12.06.2013, allowed the appeal in part in respect of charges, namely, crane hire charges and interest. - Apex court held that we find that the learned Division Bench has not kept in mind the aforesaid provisions in the Work Order and the Tender Document. BHEL was neither required to issue any notice for exercising its right to recover crane hire charges for Unit III, nor was it required to deduct such charges from the running bills of the respondent. There is no dispute or issue as regards quantum of such charges claimed by the appellant but the Arbitral Tribunal allowed it only to the extent of Rs.8.25 lac although the Tribunal itself found that the respondent had failed to produce any material in support of its defence that because the crane was out of order for a number of days when Unit No.II was under erection/instalment and, therefore, the respondent became entitled to use the crane without hire charges for Unit No.III. In such circumstances, we find that the crane hire charges claimed by the appellant were wrongly disallowed by the order under appeal passed by the Division Bench. As a result, it is held that appellant is entitled for crane hire charges and, therefore, that amount needs to be deducted from the amount payable to the respondent under the Award on other heads. It is also held that the appellant is not liable to pay any pre-Award interest and the interest @ 10.5% p.a. shall be payable by the appellant only from the date of Award till the date of payment on the Award amount now found payable, if any. We order accordingly. The order under appeal is set aside to the aforesaid extent. The appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.= CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8373 OF 2014 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No.35021 of 2013] Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. …..Appellant Versus Tata Projects Ltd. …..Respondent = 2014 - Sep. Part - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41858