Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Clause 16 provides that it is incumbent upon the contractor to avoid limitation and disputes during the course of execution. However, if such disputes takes place between the contractor and the department, effort shall be made first to settle the disputes at Company level. The Contractor should make request in writing to the Engineer-in-charge for settlement of such disputes/claims within 30 days of arising of the cause of dispute/claim failing no disputes/claims of the contractor shall be entertained by the company. Efforts shall be made to resolve the dispute in two stages:- In first stage dispute shall be referred to Area GM or GM/HOD ©. If difference still persist the dispute shall be referred to a committee constituted by the owner. The committee shall have one member of the rank of Director of the Company, who shall be chairman of the committee. If differences still persist, the settlement of the dispute shall be resolved in the following manner: Disputes relating to the commercial contracts with Central Public Sector Enterprises/Government Departments (except Railways, Income Tax, Customs and Excise Duties)/State Public Sector Enterprises shall be referred by either party for Arbitration to the PMA (Permanent Machinery of Arbitration) in the department of Public Enterprises. In case of parties other than Govt. Agencies, the redressal of the dispute may be sought in the Court of Law. Hence, Clause 16 does not reflect the intention of the parties for resolving the dispute through constitution of Arbitral Tribunal.

If differences still persist, the settlement of the dispute shall be resolved in the following manner: Disputes relating to the commercial contracts with Central Public Sector Enterprises/Government Departments (except Railways, Income Tax, Customs and Excise Duties)/State Public Sector Enterprises shall be referred by either party for Arbitration to the PMA (Permanent Machinery of Arbitration) in the department of Public Enterprises.

10. Counsel for the non-applicant submitted that there is no arbitration clause as required under Section 7 of the Act and since there is no arbitration clause, this Court cannot exercise its power to appoint arbitrator in the present case. He also submitted that the later part of Clause 16 provides only for arbitration to the PMA (Permanent Machinery of Arbitration) of arbitration in the department of public enterprises, where both parties are government agencies. The PMA is established to adjudicate the dispute between the Government parties. In case, parties other than government agencies, the redressal of the dispute would be in the court of law. The word "Court of law" has been interpreted by this Court in the case of M/s. Goyolene Fibres (India) Pvt. Limited v. M.P. State Electricity Board and another (2011) 4 MPLJ 683. He further relying on a judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Jagdish Chander Vs. Ramesh Chander and Others, (2007) 5 SCC

12. The clause 16 provides only in-house mechanism and when there is a dispute between two government agencies, the arbitration can be referred to the PMA (Permanent Machinery of Arbitration) in the terms of Public Enterprises The said mechanism has been provided only to the government agencies and PMA has been established for the said purpose. In case of parties other than government agencies the redressal of the dispute may be sought in the Court of law.

13. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, it is held that there is no arbitration agreement between the parties and in the absence of arbitration clause in the agreement, the application under Section 11(6) is not maintainable. In the result, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.