Himachal Pradesh High Court
___________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P. And Another on 20 June, 2016
Author: Rajiv Sharma
Bench: Rajiv Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Arb. Case No. 40 of 2016 .
Decided on: 20.6.2016 ___________________________________________________ Nawal Kishore and sons. ...Petitioner.
Versus State of H.P. and another. ...Respondents. ____________________________________________________________ of Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.
rt Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Parmod Thakur, Addl. A.G. ________________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral).
This petition has been filed under sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator and for appointment of an Arbitrator. Respondent-State allotted the work of construction of "C/O Upgradation on Banjar Bathad road KM 0/0 to 19/530 under PMGSY Phase-VII-Package No. HP-06-51 vide 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:37:15 :::HCHP 2
agreement No. 238 for 2006-07 as per letter dated 30.3.2007. Certain disputes arose between the parties.
.
The Superintending Engineer Arbitration Circle, HPPWD, Solan was appointed as the sole arbitrator by the Engineer-in-Chief, HPPWD vide letter dated 13.5.2014. The Arbitrator entered into reference on of 29.5.2014. The first hearing of the matter was held on 5.8.2014 and the second hearing was held on rt 18.11.2014. The third hearing was held on 7.7.2015.
Claim Nos.1 and 2 were taken up for discussion and the matter was adjourned to 24.9.2015. The Arbitrator without disclosing any cogent reasons adjourned the matter from 24.9.2015 to 23.12.2015. Till date the Arbitrator has only taken up two claims for adjudication. The purpose of referring the matter to the Arbitrator is speedy adjudication of the matter. The proceedings have been delayed unnecessarily by the previously appointed Arbitrator.
2. Accordingly, the Court is of the considered view that the Arbitrator has failed to conclude the proceedings in accordance with law and as such the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:37:15 :::HCHP 3 appointment of Arbitrator by the Engineer-in-Chief, HPPWD is terminated.
.
3. Accordingly, Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate is appointed as Arbitrator and Ms. Anita Parmar Advocate is appointed as assisting Arbitrator. The Superintending Engineer Arbitration Circle, HPPWD, of Solan is directed to handover the entire record of the proceedings to the newly appointed Arbitrator within a rt period of one week. The Arbitrator is directed to enter into reference within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order as well as record.
The Arbitrator shall commence the proceedings from the stage already arrived at by the previous Arbitrator to avoid any delay. It shall also be open to the Arbitrator to fix his fee alongwith the fee of assisting Arbitrator. The award shall be made strictly as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 within a period of six months. Needless to add that the Arbitrator shall pass a speaking order. The Registry of this Court is directed to immediately inform Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate and Ms. Anita Parmar, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:37:15 :::HCHP 4 Advocate about the passing of the order by sending a copy of this order to them.
.
4. In view of this, the petition stands disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
No costs.
(Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge.
of 20.6.2016 *awasthi* rt ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:37:15 :::HCHP