New Om Construction Co. vs Union Of India
2020 Latest Caselaw 2564 Del

                            $~9 (original)
                            *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            +      O.M.P.(T) (COMM.) 29/2020
                                   NEW OM CONSTRUCTION CO.            ..... Petitioner
                                               Through: Mr. Ankit Gupta, Adv.

                                                      versus


                                   UNION OF INDIA                               .... Respondent
                                                 Through:          Mr. Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Adv.
                                                                   Sr.Panel Counsel
                                   CORAM:
                                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C .HARI SHANKAR

                                                   O R D E R (ORAL)

% 03.09.2020 (video-conferencing)

O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 29/2020

1. This petition has been preferred under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of a substitute arbitrator, as Mr. K.K. Gupta, the learned Sole Arbitrator who had been appointed to adjudicate on the disputes between the parties, had superannuated without passing of award in the matter.

2. Reply and rejoinder had been filed. In the rejoinder, the petitioner has submitted that he has no objection to the appointment of Mr. S.S. Bansal, Additional Director (General) of the respondent, as the substitute arbitrator in place of Mr. K.K. Gupta, and as suggested vide the letter dated 28th August, 2020 of the respondent. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL

Signing Date:08.09.2020 21:18:42

3. Mr. Ankit Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view thereof, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition which may be disposed of accordingly.

4. In these circumstances, Mr. S.S. Bansal, Additional Director (General) of the respondent department, is appointed, by consent, as substitute arbitrator, in place of Mr. K.K. Gupta, who was conducting the arbitral proceedings thus far.

5. Learned Counsel for the parties are ad idem that, while Mr Bansal would not be required to re-record the evidence already recorded, final arguments in the matter may be addressed before him de novo.

6. Accordingly, Mr. Bansal would take over the proceedings from the stage of hearing of final arguments, whereafter he would proceed to pass the award in the matter.

7. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

SEPTEMBER 03, 2020/kr

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL

Signing Date:08.09.2020 21:18:42