B.B.R. Construction Company vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 140 Cal/2

ORDER SHEET

                               AP No. 332 of 2020

                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
                                ORIGINAL SIDE


                       B.B.R. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
                                   Versus
                               UNION OF INDIA


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE
  Date : February 11, 2021.
  (Via Video Conference)

                                                                     Appearance:
                                                          Mr. Prantik Garai, Adv.
                                                               ...for the Petitioner

                                                       Mrs. Aparna Banerjee, Adv.
                                                                    ...for the UOI


      The Court : A contract for construction of RCC box bridges and ancillary

works was awarded by the respondent railways to the petitioner. Disputes and

differences arose between the parties in relation to such contract. Admittedly, the

contract contained an arbitration clause for resolution of the disputes between

the parties. The petitioner invoked such arbitration clause. The railway

authorities appointed an arbitrator. The arbitrator published his award rejecting

the petitioner's claim nos. 2 to 7, 9 and 10. The petitioner challenged such

rejection by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996. By a judgment and order dated March 6, 2020, that

portion of the arbitral award was set aside by this Court. Consequently, the said

claims of the petitioner would have to be re-adjudicated by an arbitral tribunal.

The petitioner through its advocate wrote a letter dated June 15, 2020 to

the Chief Administrative Officer (Con), Eastern Railway recording its grievance

that even after passage of three months after this Court's order dated March 6,

2020, the railway authorities did not take any steps for appointing an arbitrator

for fresh adjudication of the petitioner's claims. In the said letter, the petitioner

also said that it was appointing a learned advocate as the sole arbitrator in view

of the total silence and inaction on the part of the railway authorities. The

petitioner has not received any response to the said letter either. Accordingly, the

petitioner is before this Court with an application under Section 11(6) of the Act

of 1996.

I have also heard Mrs. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for the

respondent.

Admittedly there is an arbitration clause between the parties.

Undisputedly, disputes have arisen between the parties in relation to the contract

which contains the arbitration clause. Hence, this application must succeed.

Justice Sahidullah Munshi (Mobile No.- 8335073597 / 9831343046

7439506907), a former Judge of this Court is appointed as sole arbitrator for the

purpose of adjudicating the disputes between the parties which have arisen in

relation to the subject contract. The arbitrator shall decide the place of sitting in

consultation with the parties. The arbitrator shall be free to fix his fees and to

engage secretarial staff for conducting the arbitration proceedings. The fees of the

arbitrator as well as the remuneration of the secretarial staff shall be borne by

the parties in equal shares.

AP No. 332 of 2020 is, accordingly, disposed of.

(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.)

sg.