C. M. Nayar,j. ( 1 ) THE present petition has been filed under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for appointment of an arbitrator and for reference of disputes as a consequence thereof. The petitioner was awarded a contract by the respondent for construction of a new International Cargo Complex for the Indira Gandhi International Airport, Palam, New Delhi vide Contract No. APD-1/nitc/1/88-81 dated 27th March 1981 for a total consideration of Rs. 1,23,34,466. 00. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has stated the disputes which were required to be REFERRED TO to arbitration in paragraph 21 of the petition which may be reproduced as under:- ____________________________________________________________________________ "claim No. 1 Short payment made against final bill submitted vide letter No. 1557 dated 30. 7. 87 (Rs. 123. 35 - Rs. 113. 80), Rs. 9. 55 lacs Claim No. 2 Short payment against extra items of work (Rs. 48. 43 - Rs. 27. 78), Rs. 24. 65 lacs Claim No. 3 Short payment made against labour, materials and POLs escalation. , Rs. 7. 07 lacs Claim No. 4 Refund of double recovery made by Department. , Rs. 1. 88 lacs Claim No. 5 Refund of Rs. 1 lac,, received by the Respondent, on illegal and unwarranted encashment of the Bank Guarantee, furnished by the petitioner. , Rs. 1. 00 lac Claim No. 6 Refund of liquidated damages levied by Department, Rs. 6. 175 lacs Claim No. 7 Damages and losses suffered due to prolongation in the execution and completion of the contract work from 10. 07. 82 to 07. 03. 86 due to various acts of omission and commission on the part of the Department. , Rs. 30. 00 lacs Rs. 80. 325 lacs Claim No. 8 Extra payment due to us against supply of SALIMA STEEL as per para (a) and (b) page-9 of award dated 6. 8. 85 by Mr. J. S. Marya Sole Arbitrator regarding contract for the work noted above, equivalent to interest charges that may be due to respondent. , Claim No. 9 Payment of interest on outstanding payments from 30. 10. 87, the date of expiry of 3 months from the date of submission of the final bill, to date of reference and from date of reference to date of decree or payment whichever is earlier @ 18% per annum. , Claim No. 9 Payment of interest on outstanding payments from 30. 10. 87, the date of expiry of 3 months from the date of submission of the final bill, to date of reference and from date of reference to date of decree or payment whichever is earlier @ 18% per annum. ", ____________________________________________________________________________ ( 3 ) THE respondent has filed reply wherein it is stated that by a letter No. Engg/ce/arc/3/96/188 dated 22nd January 1996 the appointment of Shri S. C. Gupta, Chief Engineer, SPG Project, CPWD, New Delhi as the sole arbitrator has already been made. Sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 20-21 of the reply reads as follows:- " (3) However, the Chief Engineer (ARC) in exercise of the powers or function conferred on or entrusted to him in terms of arbitration agreement contained in the said Clause 25 of the Agreement, has by a letter No. Engg/ce/arc/3/96/188 dated 22. 1. 96 appointed Shri S. C. Gupta, Chief Engineer, SPG Project, CPWD, New Delhi as the Sole Arbitrator and made reference of the disputes set up in para 21 of the Petition to the said appointed Arbitrator. A true copy of the said letter of appointment and reference dated 22. 1. 96 is annexed hereto and marked Annexure `r-1 . " ( 4 ) THE reply also contains statement of claims as REFERRED TO to in the `annexure where the respondent has REFERRED TO Claim Nos. 1 to 9 to the arbitrator for adjudication. The first grievance of the petitioner is, therefore, satisfied. Subsequently an application was moved, I. A. No. 9896/96, wherein in paragraph 9 the petitioner has re-stated the claims and it has been alleged that two claims were omitted from the petition which are also liable to be REFERRED TO for adjudication. These are claim Nos. 10 and 11. Similarly in paragraph 10 the petitioner recalculated the amounts in respect of claim Nos. 2,4 and 7 as these were alleged to have undergone change of valuation. The total claims are now REFERRED TO to in Annexure-A filed to the application. ( 5 ) THE matter is at the preliminary stage before the arbitrator and it is conceded that the petitioner as well as the respondent have not yet filed their claims and counter claims. Therefore, it is open for the petitioner to finalise his claims and file the statement of claims before the arbitrator for adjudication. ( 5 ) THE matter is at the preliminary stage before the arbitrator and it is conceded that the petitioner as well as the respondent have not yet filed their claims and counter claims. Therefore, it is open for the petitioner to finalise his claims and file the statement of claims before the arbitrator for adjudication. This course is permitted in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court as reported in Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi and another Vs. M/s Alkarma, New Delhi, AIR 1985 Delhi 132. Paragraph 16 of the judgment reads as under:- "16. To put it differently, just as the principles analogous to O. 2 R. 2 are applicable to the arbitration proceedings, similarly, principles analogous to O. 6 R. 17 would also be applicable. We are unable to agree with the learned single Judge that in no case would the provisions of O. 2 R. 2 be applicable. While the learned single Judge has rightly held that the principles of res judicata apply to arbitration proceedings, but we are unable to agree with him that the provisions of O. 2 R. 2, which according to the learned single Judge are draconian in nature, would never be applicable. In our opinion, the provisions of O. 2 R. 2 would apply, as we have already stated hereinabove, if the request for referring more disputes to arbitration is made after the making of the award. Once an award has been made, a party cannot be permitted to raise more disputes which he/it could and ought to have raised earlier. Where, however, an award has not been made, it is open to a claimant to ask for more disputes to be REFERRED TO to arbitration provided the arbitration proceedings are not yet over. In such an event, if the authority competent to appoint an arbitrator and to refer the disputes, fails to do so, the Court has the jurisdiction to order the filing of the arbitration agreement and to direct the Engineer Member to refer the disputes to arbitration. " ( 6 ) IN view of the above the arbitrator as appointed by the respondent shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law and adjudicate the claims as well as counter claims as may be submitted by both the parties. " ( 6 ) IN view of the above the arbitrator as appointed by the respondent shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law and adjudicate the claims as well as counter claims as may be submitted by both the parties. The petitioner shall now submit its claims before the learned arbitrator within eight weeks from today and the respondent shall file counter claims within six weeks thereafter. It will be open for the arbitrator to decide the admissibility and maintainability of claims as well as counter claims as may be filed by the parties in accordance with the provisions of law. This petition is disposed of in the above terms.