Delhi High Court - Orders
Prl Projectes And Infrastrcucture Ltd vs Airports Authority Of India on 11 September, 2023
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 632/2023
PRL PROJECTES AND INFRASTRCUCTURE LTD..... Petitioner
Through: Ms.Anusuya Salwan, Advocate.
versus
AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA
..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Arun Sanwal, Advocate with
Mr.Sachin Yadav, AGM (Law).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 11.09.2023
1. Since 08.09.2023 the date fixed was declared a holiday on account of the preparations for G-20 Summit, held on 09th and 10th September 2023, the matter is taken up today.
2. The Petitioner has filed the present petition seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 on account of the Respondent's letter dated 20.03.2023 to the Notices of the Petitioner of dated 11.10.2022 and of 06.01.2023 rejecting the request for conciliation and appointment of Dispute Resolution Committee in terms of Section 25(i) of the Agreement.
3. The arbitration clause is as under :
Clause 25
ii) Adjudication through Arbitration:- Except where the decision has become final, binding and conclusive in terms of Sub Para (i) above, disputes or differences shall be referred for adjudication through arbitration by a sole arbitrator appointed by the Member (Planning) / Chairman, AAI.
4. The main grievance of the learned counsel for the respondent is the 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 16/09/2023 at 17:53:56 claims, if any, are beyond limitation. However admittedly the date of completion of the work was 13.07.2018; completion of defect liability period was 12.07.2019 and the date of final payment was 19.10.2019. Further recovery of excess payments were made on 01.09.2020, hence it would definitely increase the period of limitation.
5. Moreso, In re : cognizance for extension of limitation in Suo Moto writ petition (C) No.3/2020 it was held :
5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel and the impact of the surge of the virus on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the prevailing conditions, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the M.A. No. 21 of 2022 with the following directions:
I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasijudicial proceedings.
II. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022.
III. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
IV. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of 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 16/09/2023 at 17:53:56 Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.
6. Thus the arbitration was invoked within the period of limitation and the argument to the contrary has no merit. No other issue is raised at this stage by the respondent.
7. Considering the above facts Mr.Dipak Misra, the Chief Justice of India (Retd.) (Mob.9560333111) is hereby appointed as an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The rights and contentions of the parties are left open. As submitted by both the parties the fee shall be governed by 4th Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
8. The petition stands disposed of along with pending application, if any. Order dasti.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2023 VLD 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 16/09/2023 at 17:53:56