which the prices increased abnormally as the material was to be procured from a huge distance beyond the ban area. The Sole Arbitrator held that the abnormal situation which arose due to a ban on mining by the Apex Court could not have been countenanced at the time of the acceptance of contract. The Respondent had informed the Appellant and requested it to revise the rates which had never been denied nor refuted by the Appellant. On the basis of this, an amount of Rs.67,86,655/- has been awarded towards claim no.1 in favour of the Respondent. As far as claim no.2 is concerned, the Sole Arbitrator held that the Appellant has not disputed the rate analysis. The Arbitrator held that the Appellant herein had admitted the Certificate dated 27.08.2004 where the Respondent has done embankment fill with fly ash of 2,28,836 cubic meters and an amount of Rs.36,61,376/was awarded in favour of the Claimant. As far as claim no.3 and 4 are concerned, the same were rejected. As far as claim no.5 is concerned, a sum of Rs.6,16,122/- was awarded to the Respondent as compensation due to delay in payment of security deposit. Resultantly, the summary of the Award of claims reads as under:
