Vijender Jain, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioner for making theaward a rule of the Court. Respondent-Union of India filed objections undersections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, inter alia, challenging the award andpraying that the award made and published by Arbitrator on 12/12/1990be set aside. ( 2 ) MR. ASHOK Bhasin learned Counsel for the respondent has vehementlyargued that the Arbitrator has misconducted the proceedings and there are errorswhich are apparent on the record. He has also argued that in terms of Clause 25 ofthe arbitration agreement where the award is more than Rs. 50,000. 00, the Arbitratorhas to give reasons. Mr. Bhasin has contended that the award is without any reason. ( 3 ) CLAIM No. 1 is a claim of contractor for a sum of Rs. 2,86,000. 00. Thearbitrator has allowed Rs. 1,31,000. 00 out of the said claim. Mr. Bhasin has drawnmy attention to the heading of claim No. 1 in the award which shows that thecontractor has claimed a sum of Rs. 2,20,000. 00 but while discussing the claim thearbitrator has stated that in statement of claim filed by the petitioner claim No. 1was for Rs. 2,86,000. 00. The contention of Mr. Bhasin is that in view of the fact thatthe claimant has only demanded Rs. 2,20,000. 00 the Arbitrator has committed aserious irregularity in treating the claim of the petitioner as Rs. 2,86,000. 00. This argument of the learned Counsel for the respondent is devoid of any force as fromperusing the original statement of claim filed by the claimant the amount is Rs. 2,86,000. 00. The amount shown in the heading of Claim No. 1 as 2,20,000. 00 may beinadvertently shown. ( 4 ) THE next contention raised by the learned Counsel for the respondent is thatthe conclusions based by the Arbitrator are without any reason. It is well settledprinciple of law that when an Arbitrator is an expert Court cannot substitute itsown opinion even if the Court comes to a different opinion. The impugned claimhas been thoroughly discussed by the Arbitrator. Award is a reasoned awarded. Itis also important to note that once the parties choose the forum of arbitration inexclusion of normal forum of Civil Court the award made by the Arbitrator shouldnot lightly be interfered. It cannot be interfered except in situations which areprovided under Sees. 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act. Award is a reasoned awarded. Itis also important to note that once the parties choose the forum of arbitration inexclusion of normal forum of Civil Court the award made by the Arbitrator shouldnot lightly be interfered. It cannot be interfered except in situations which areprovided under Sees. 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act. I see no force in thearguments of learned Counsel for the respondent regarding Claim No. 1. ( 5 ) THE other objection raised by the learned Counsel for the respondent is withregard to claim No. 3. Under the heading of claim No. 3, the Arbitrator hascumulatively allowed Rs. 39,000. 00. Claim No. 3 is the claim which the contractorhas claimed on the following counts:- (a) Reimbursement of extra expenses paid on extra overheads. Rs. 37,500. 00. ( 6 ) MR. BHASIN has contended that the award of this amount is bad on twocounts, firstly he says that while awarding a sum of Rs. 1,31,000. 00 under claim No. I the Arbitrator has taken into consideration this particular head. Secondly, he saysin other words there is an error apparent on the record as amount claimed was Rs. 37,500. 00 whereas the Arbitrator had allowed Rs. 39,000. 00. I feel that there issubstance in the argument of learned Counsel for the respondent because in theaward under overhead on the one hand the Arbitrator has recorded that thecontractor must mitigate some element of increase in price of contract but ultimately has awarded sum of Rs. 39,000. 00 to be paid by Union of India to thepetitioner. I think the Arbitrator has misconducted the proceedings on this countas far as this part of Claim No. 3 is concerned. I set aside the award made by thearbitrator under heading overhead . ( 7 ) THE rest of the award and the objections raised by the learned Counsel forthe respondent are similar which have been dealt with by me in disposing of Claimno. 1. ( 8 ) IN view of the discussion made above, I make the award a rule of the Courtexcept that in place of a sum of Rs. 2,00,500. 00 as awarded by the Arbitrator theaward will be to the extent of Rs. 1,65,500. 00 on account of my disallowance of thesum of Rs. 39,000. 00 under the heading overhead under Claim No. 3 (a ). Award tothis extent is made a rule of the Court. 2,00,500. 00 as awarded by the Arbitrator theaward will be to the extent of Rs. 1,65,500. 00 on account of my disallowance of thesum of Rs. 39,000. 00 under the heading overhead under Claim No. 3 (a ). Award tothis extent is made a rule of the Court. Decree in terms of the award be passed. Thepetitioner is entitled to interest from the date of the award till realisation at the rateof 12 per cent per annum. The petition is disposed of.