Jagdish Chandra ( 1 ) IN pursuance to the petition moved under section 14 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, respondent No. 2 Mr. S. C. Khatyal (Superintending Engineer), Arbitrator, was called upon to file the award in court and he complied. Notice of the filing of the award was given to the parties and they were called upon to file objections against the same within the statutory period allowed under the law and it was respondent No. 1 Delhi Development Authority (for short DDA) alone which filed the objections against the award. The objections of the D. D. A. were resisted by the petitioner. ( 2 ) MR. M. L. Jain learned counsel for respondent No. I D. D. A. raised a fundamental objection against the award of the Arbitrator in respect of claims No. 1, 7 and 11 contending that no reasons in respect of the same had been given by the Arbitrator even though under Clause 25 of the agreement be was bound to give reasons for his award. This objection was specifically raised in sub-para (ii) of para 6 of the objections and the relevant portion thereof is reproduced below :- "that the reference to the arbitrator was under clause 25 of the agreement between parties which enjoined the arbitrator to give reasons for the award. This was mandatory. The learned Arbitrator gave no reasons in support of his award on claims No. 1, 7 and 11. . . " ( 3 ) IN the reply to the objections the petitioner did not specifically controvert this objection but remained content by giving only a very vague reply. So, the petitioner shall be deemed to have admitted this objection raised by respondent No. 1 D. D. A. that the award ought to have been a reasoned one and this deeming admission on the part of the petitioner has to be relied upon especially for the reason that neither party has filed the agreement which contains Clause 25 and even the arbitration proceedings do not contain it, ( 4 ) A perusal of the award shows that no reasons whatsoever were given in respect of claims No. 1 and 7 and whatever reasons have been given against claim No. 11 the same do not satisfy the elements of "reasons". Clause 10 C of the General Rules and Regulations of the D. D. A. which covers all such agreements including the agreement in question postulates that the increase in the price of material and/or wages of labour must be the direct result of coming into force of any fresh law or statutory rule or order and such increase exceeds 10% of the price and/or wages prevailing at the time of the receipt of the tender for the work, and the contractor thereupon necessarily and properly pays in respect thereof. Reasons to this effect have not been given by the Arbitrator against claim No. 11. Thus, the reasons given by the Arbitrator against claim No. 11 cannot be called reasons properly so called. ( 5 ) IN the face of the aforesaid discussion, the award in respect of claims No. 1, 7 and 11 has to be remitted back to the Arbitrator and he is directed to give reasons in support of claims 1, 7 and 11. The Arbitrator shall rehear the parties and give the reasoned award in respect of claims No. 1, 7 and 11, as per Clause 25 of the agreement. This also disposes of objections contained in I. A. No. 611 of 1986. No order as to costs.