Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Tarkeshwar Shah vs The Chief Engineer on 20 August, 2021

Author: Ravi Malimath

Bench: Ravi Malimath

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                   ON THE 20th DAY OF AUGUST 2021




                                                        .

                              BEFORE

              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,





                       ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE


                   ARBITRATION CASE No.118 of 2019


       Between:-

       TARKESHWAR SHAH,
                r           to
       SON OF LATE SH. TILAK SHAH,

       GOVT. CONTRACTOR,
       R/O OM APARTMENT,
       DINGLE ESTATE, SHIMLA-171003, H.P.
                                                     ......PETITIONER



       (BY SH. SUNEET GOEL, ADVOCATE)

       AND




    1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
       SHIMLA ZONE, HPPWD,





       NIRMAN BHAWAN,
       NIGAM VIHAR, SHIMLA-171002.
    2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,





       HPPWD DIVISION NO.3.
       WINTER FIELD, SHIMLA-171003
                                                ......RESPONDENTS

       (BY SH. ASHOK SHARMA,
        ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH
        SH. RANJAN SHARMA AND
        SH. VIKAS RATHORE,
        ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL)




                                       ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:55:28 :::CIS
                                         -2-


          This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble
    Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, passed the following:




                                                                .

                                   ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court in this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act'), seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute that has arisen between the parties.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that there was an agreement, vide Annexure P-1, between the petitioner and the respondents and accordingly a contract was entered into between the parties. Certain disputes have arisen thereon. Clause-25 of the agreement provides for appointment of an Arbitrator.

3. The respondents have filed the counter-affidavit. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, the fact that such an arbitration clause exists, has not been denied.

4. Under Section 11(6) of the Act, the High Court, while considering any application under Section 11(6) thereof, must confine its examination only to the existence of an Arbitration agreement. Since the existence of an arbitration agreement has not been disputed by the respondents, this application must be ordered, and the dispute referred to arbitration.

::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:55:28 :::CIS -3-

5. Having considered the contentions of both sides, Er. Rakesh .

Gupta, Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.), R/o House No. B-18, Sector-2 Lane-5, New Shimla-171009, H.P., is appointed as an Arbitrator after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the Act; and only after receipt thereof shall his appointment, as an Arbitrator, come into force.

6. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Er. Rakesh Gupta, Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.), shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. The learned Arbitrator shall fix his fees in consultation with both the parties.

7. The arbitration petition is disposed off accordingly.

( Ravi Malimath ) Acting Chief Justice August 20, 2021 Bhardwaj/Himalvi ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:55:28 :::CIS