Y.K. Jain vs The Indian Archaeological ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 1778 Del

Citation : 2002 Latest Caselaw 1778 Del
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2002

Delhi High Court

Y.K. Jain vs The Indian Archaeological ... on 27 September, 2002

Author: S Mukherjee

Bench: S Mukerjee

JUDGMENT

S. Mukherjee, J.

1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Concilliation Act 1996, with a prayer for appointment of an arbitrator by the Court in terms of Clause 138 of the General Conditions of Contract.

2. As per the judgment of the Apex Court reported as Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. and Anr. v. Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd. JT 2000(Suppl. 2) SC 150 while deciding a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, this Court is not to enter upon and/or adjudicate the disputed questions of facts, nor is this Court to go into the merits of the respective contentions of the parties.

3. In this case vide letter dated 14.12.2001, the petitioner had invoked the arbitration enclosing therewith the details of claims. Reminder was also sent on 5.1.2002. The respondents having failed to appoint an arbitrator within the statutory period even after the said notice and reminder, the appointment now has to be made by this Court.

4. In the circumstances, without going into the disputed questions of fact and/or the merits of the case, I appoint Shri Rajesh Lakhanpal, Advocate of this Court who happens to be having an engineering background, as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes as set out in paragraph 'g' of the petition and also any counter-claims that may be validly agitated by the respondent.

5. The arbitrator will fix his own fee. He will conduct the arbitration expeditiously and preferably complete the same by making and publishing his award within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.

6.The parties to appear before the Sole Arbitrator on Saturday 28.9.2002 at 11.00 A.M. Copy of this order be made available dusty under signatures of the Court Master to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who will in turn, make available photocopies of the same to the respondent and the learned Sole Arbitrator.

7. Ordered accordingly. AA 67/2002 is disposed of but with no order as ti costs. dusty.