Himachal Pradesh High Court
M/S Cs Direkt Events And Exhibitions vs Department Of Tourism & Civil Aviation on 12 December, 2025
( 2025:HHC:43730 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
Arb. Case No.111 of 2025
Date of Decision:- 12.12.2025
M/s CS Direkt Events and Exhibitions ....Petitioner
Private Limited
Versus
Department of Tourism & Civil Aviation ....Respondent
of
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice
Whether approved for reporting?1 rt For the Petitioner : Mr. K. Shiva, Advocate (through video conferencing) with Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Atul G. Sood, Advocate.
G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral).
The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator.
2. As per the notice dated 05.02.2024 (Annexure P-18) arbitration proceedings were sought to be initiated in terms of Clause 20 of Agreement for Operation and Maintenance for the Design and installation of Light, Sound and multimedia show having Wow effect at Town Square, Mall Road, Shimla.
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2025 20:31:26 :::CIS 23. The dispute as such has arisen that the approval made to appoint a former retired Chief Justice of this Court was .
not settled there. The response to the notice as such was only on account of the fact that the respondent would have to entail the expense of housing the Arbitrator and the stay at Shimla would cause extra burden and they would have also to travel out of of station.
4. The counter claim has been also put that the rt respondent was entitled for Liquidated Damages as such of Rs.25,000/- per week. It is thus, apparent that there is no serious dispute as such regarding the mode of settlement of the dispute which the parties have agreed to.
5. As per the written statement also the entire project was delayed due to non-adherence of the scheduled dates by the petitioner and there was slow pace as such and the opportunities were given to the Contractor to complete the work by 30.06.2022 and the Contract was terminated eventually on 11.08.2022.
6. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion, keeping in view the fact that the parties have agreed to resolve the dispute by way of an independent Arbitrator, therefore, the matter is liable to be as such settled by ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2025 20:31:26 :::CIS 3 way of the forum which the parties had agreed to resolve the matter by way of arbitration.
.
7. Keeping in view the above, the present petition is allowed and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surender Singh, former Judge, R/o 627, Amit Apartment, Near The Mall, Opposite Sainik Rest House, Solan, Himachal Pradesh is appointed as an Arbitrator to of adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Only after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the rt Act and only after receipt thereof, his appointment, as an Arbitrator, shall come into force.
8. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surender Singh, former Judge, shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law.
9. Copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel for the parties and also be furnished to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator so appointed shall be entitled to fee as per stipulation contained in 4 th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2025 20:31:26 :::CIS 410. Accordingly, the application is disposed of alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
.
(G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice 12th December, 2025 (Munish Thakur) of rt ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2025 20:31:26 :::CIS