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 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd vs Haryan State Roads & Bridges ... on 23 September, 2016

Author: S.J. Vazifdar

Bench: S.J. Vazifdar

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                           CHANDIGARH


                                                     ARB-149-2016 (O&M)
                                          Date of decision:- 23.09.2016

       KCC Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
                                                         ...Petitioner
                                Versus

       Haryana State Roads & Bridges Development Corporation
       Ltd. and others
                                              ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE

Present:- Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Advocate,
          for the petitioner.

           Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana.
                      * * * *
S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioner had earlier filed ARB-202-2015 which I disposed of by my order and judgement dated 05.02.2016. I observed that to the petitioner's notice invoking arbitration, the respondents agreed to refer the further disputes and differences to arbitration provided the petitioner fulfilled its obligation of depositing a claim fee of 2% of the claim amount. The petitioner, however, had not done so even on 05.02.2016. I, therefore, disposed of the petition by directing the Engineer-in-Chief to appoint an arbitrator on behalf of the respondents in accordance with the arbitration clause. I, however, directed that the time to appoint the arbitrator would exclude the time upto which the claim fee of 2% of the claim amount was deposited.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2016 04:16:44 ::: ARB-149-2016 (O&M) 2

3. The petitioner under cover of a letter dated 29.02.2016 deposited a sum of ` 5,80,600/- being 2% of the claim and expressly called upon the respondents to nominate an arbitrator. It is also pertinent to note that this letter referred to the said ARB-202-2015 and the said order dated 05.02.2016.

4. Despite the same, the respondents purported to appoint an arbitrator only on 13.07.2016. However, this petition was filed only on 18.07.2016. The appointment, therefore, though after the period of 30 days, was before this petition was filed. It cannot, therefore, be said that the respondents have forfeited their right to nominate an arbitrator.

5. The petition is, therefore, disposed of.

6. It is for the two arbitrators to appoint the Presiding Arbitrator.

(S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE 23.09.2016 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2016 04:16:45 :::