The High Court of Delhi was dealing with the petition filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Arbitrator on behalf of respondent to adjudicate the disputes with respondent.
Petitioner was awarded construction of civil and associated works for proposed Silos Complex at Batala by respondent vide Tender document and subsequently through a Contract Agreement it has to be completed in a time frame of 8 months. Respondent failed to provide land and other miscellaneous support, due to which the petitioner was unable to execute the work, therefore, the project is running onto its 40th Month.
According to petitioner, due to failure of the obligations of respondent, petitioner issued the Termination Notice cum Notice invoking Arbitration whereby the petitioner terminated the Contract and nominated its Arbitrator, namely, Justice S.P. Garg, and upon receipt of the said notice, respondent replied refuting the contentions of the petitioner, however, in its reply neither respondent denied the existence of the Arbitration Agreement nor nominated its Arbitrator. Therefore, the present petition has been filed by petitioner to nominate Arbitrator on part of respondent in terms of Clause 62 ("Arbitration Clause") forming a part of the Contract as executed between the parties.
The learned counsel for petitioner prays that sole Arbitrator may be appointed through DIAC to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Learned counsel for respondent has not objected to the appointment of sole Arbitrator for adjudication of dispute between the parties.
The HC allowed the present petition. HC appointed Mr. Justice (Retd.) J.R. Midha as the sole Arbitrator in this petition to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The HC ordered that the arbitration shall be conducted under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait
Case Title: Rajendra Mittal Construction Co Pvt Ltd. v. NCML Batala Pvt Ltd.
Case Details: ARB.P. 1092/2021
Picture Source :
