ORDER : Mr. P. Sathasivam, J. - This Special Leave Petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 06.08.2004 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in ARB Appeal No.2 of 2002 by which the High Court had modified the award of the arbitrator by holding that the respondent was entitled to Rs. 71, 298/- along with the interest as awarded by the arbitrator. 2. Both the parties had entered into an agreement on 07.08.1993 and when a dispute arose under the terms of the agreement, the same was referred to a sale arbitrator who was the Chief Engineer (Arbitration), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited for adjudication. By the award dated 29.12.2000, the arbitrator on consideration of materials placed before him by both the parties passed an award on claim Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9, the total whereof came to Rs. 1,18,643/- with pendente lite interest at the rate of 15% per annum with further condition that the interest shall run at the rate of 18% per annum, if the amount of award was not paid within 90 days from the date of publication of the order. 3. The respondent filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the said award. The District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar dismissed the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal before the High Court which allowed the appeal in part and modified the award in respect of claim No.1 by holding that the respondent was entitled to recover from the petitioner twice the rates, i.e., double the amount of Rs. 47,345/- from the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the petitioner has filed this Special Leave Petition. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after considering the relevant clauses in the contract itself, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the High Court in view of the fact that the High Court had rightly held that in view of the specific clause, namely, Clause 42(iii) of the agreement, the petitioner was entitled to the double of the amount awarded by the arbitrator in his award, i.e., double of the amount of Rs. 47,345/- which was claim No.1 in the award of the arbitrator. 47,345/- which was claim No.1 in the award of the arbitrator. So far as the recovery of the materials are concerned, the position is admitted. 5. The only question before the High Court was whether the respondent under Clause 42(iii) of the contract would be entitled to the double of the amount as the arbitrator had awarded. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order of the High Court as under the contract precisely under Clause 42(iii) of the contract, the respondent was entitled to recover the double of the amount granted by the arbitrator. 6. Accordingly, there is no merit in the Special Leave Petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as costs.