Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S. B. B. Construction vs Union Of India on 23 May, 2023
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 393/2023
M/S. B. B. CONSTRUCTION ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.S.W.Haider, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Bhagvan Swaroop Shukla,
CGSC with Mr.Sarvan Kumar,
GP, Mr.Saksham Sethi,
Ms.Sunita Shukla, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 23.05.2023
1. This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Contract Agreement no.63-W /41/536-WA dated 02.06.2021 executed between the parties.
2. The Arbitration Agreement between the parties is contained in Clause 64.1 of the Indian Railways Standard General Condition of Contract.
3. The disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner invoked the Arbitration Agreement vide notice dated 12.01.2023. In response to the notice, the respondent vide letter dated 30.01.2023 called upon the petitioner to give a waiver under Proviso to Section 12(5) of the Act for appointment of an Arbitrator who is the Railway's Gazetted Officer (JAG/SAG). As the petitioner was not willing to give such waiver, the petitioner filed the present petition.
4. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondent vide order dated 13.04.2023. In spite of time granted, the reply has not been filed.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 23:38:55
5. The learned counsel for the respondent prays for further time to file the reply. In my opinion, as sufficient time has already been granted to the respondent to file the reply, the prayer cannot be acceded to.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent reiterates that the petitioner should be called upon to give waiver in terms of the Proviso to Section 12(5) of the Act for appointment of a serving/retired officer of the respondent to be appointed as an Arbitrator.
7. As the petitioner is unwilling to give such waiver, the petitioner cannot be forced to give the same. The objection of the respondent is accordingly rejected.
8. The learned counsels for the parties pray that keeping in view the amount of claim involved, instead of three members Arbitral Tribunal, a Sole Arbitrator be appointed. The learned counsels for the parties further pray that the arbitration proceedings be held under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (in short, 'DIAC').
9. I accordingly appoint Mr. Justice A.K. Chawla, Retired Judge of this Court, Tel. No.9910384636, as a Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the abovementioned contract. The Arbitrator shall give the disclosure under Section 12 of the Act before entering upon the reference.
10. The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted under the aegis of the DIAC and in accordance with its rules including fee structure.
11. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J MAY 23, 2023/Arya Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 23:38:55