G. C. Mittal ( 1 ) ADMIT. The only dispute raised herein is about claim No. 11. The contractor had claimed Rs. 70,600 under this claim and the arbitrator awarded Rs. 28,917. The Delhi Development Authority challenged the award under item No. 11 on the ground that under the arbitration agreement the arbitrator was obliged to give reasons for the conclusion to be arrived at and since the arbitrator did not give reasons for arriving at the figure of Rs. 28,917, the award with regard to item No. 11 is liable to be set aside. The learned Single Judge of this court agreed with this and by order dated 4th November, 1988 set aside the claim awarded under claim No. 11. ( 2 ) THIS is appeal by the Contractor. The sole argument raised on behalf of the Contractor is that in case the award is to be set aside as the arbitrator did not give reasons in support of the conclusion, the matter should have been remitted to the arbitrator for deciding afresh the claim made under item No. 11 on the material already on record. The argument is refuted by the learned counsel for the respondents but we feel that the argument deserves to be accepted. Once the objection is raised that the award does not give any reasons and has to be set aside, the matter should have been remitted to the arbitrator for a fresh decision and the learned counsel for the respondent does not make out any cause for not following this procedure. ( 3 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge with regard to claim No. 11 is modified to the extent that the arbitrator will consider claim No. 11 again and after hearing both sides will pass a speaking order giving reasons, for determining the amount, if any. The remaining order of the learned Single Judge to upheld. The arbitrator will decide this matter within a period of two months of appearance of the parties before him. ( 4 ) THE parties are directed to appear before the arbitrator on 9th December, 1991.