ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. By an Award of a sole Arbitrator dated 17.11.2011 as many as 15 claims were made aggregating to Rs. 2,99,00,000/-. Of these claims, 11 claims were granted. One such claim was claim no. 6 for which the Award granted a sum of Rs. 1,29,17,240/-. This claim was challenged in a Section 34 petition which was upheld by the learned District Judge stating that the Engineer- in-Chief had not raised any objection and two Committees had been appointed which found that the claim of the appellant before us was in order. 3. In an appeal under Section 37, the High Court interfered with the Award in question as well as the District Judge?s judgment and found that out of the dismantled material 20% could be reused, as a result of which claim No.6 which was awarded @ Rs. 1,29,17,240/- was reduced by 20% and Rs.1,03,33,792/-granted. 4. Having heard learned counsel for both sides, we are of the view that the High Court could not have interfered with the well-reasoned arbitral award as well as the well-reasoned District Judge judgment under Section 34. 20% that could be reused, according to the High Court, of the dismantled material, is a rabbit taken out of a hat as no evidence whatsoever has been pointed out to us to sustain this figure of 20%. Further it is also clear that the High Court was not hearing an appeal. It has forgotten that it was exercising a limited jurisdiction in appeal constrained by the limits mentioned in Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. 5. This being the case, we allow the appeal and set aside the High Court judgment and restore that of the learned District Judge. 6. We direct the respondent-State to pay the decretal amount within a period of eight weeks from today.