Delhi High Court
M/S Inderjit Mehta Constructions ... vs Union Of India & Anr. on 7 December, 2021
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 07.12.2021
+ ARB.P. 899/2021
M/S INDERJIT MEHTA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT
LTD ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Praveen Chauhan, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .... Respondents
Through Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar,
CGSC with Mr. Syed Husain Adil
Taqvi, GP, Mr. Karan Chhibber and
Ms. S. Bushra Kazim, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole
Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes with respondents.
2. Petitioner is a private limited company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956 and is in the business of construction.
3. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are State under Article 12 of the Constitution
of India and are department of UOI under the Ministry of Defence.
respondent No.1 is Accepting Officer of the subject Contract and respondent
No.2 is the Appointing Authority of Arbitrator.
4. As per the averments made in the present petition, petitioner and
respondent No.1 had entered into a contract for Completion of Balance
Work for Construction of Dwelling Units including Allied Services for
Officers, JCOs/OR's at Kirkee bearing C.A. NO. DGMAP/PHASE-II/PKG-
23/A/R&C/04 of 2015-2016. After completion of the work, certain disputes
arose and in respect to the same, a notice dated 22.06.2019 invoking
arbitration was issued by the petitioner to DGMAP vide letter dated
22.06.2019 but no response was received from the respondents. Again a
letter dated 27.07.2019 was issued to respondent No.2 for appointment of
arbitrator and the same was received by the respondent No.2 on 30.07.2019.
However, despite these requests, respondent No.2 failed to appoint any
Arbitrator.
5. Pertinently, petitioner had thereafter approached this Court seeking
appointment of Arbitrator [Arbitration Petition No.691 of 2019] and vide
order dated 24.01.2020, this Court had appointed Mr. K.B Rai, former
Chief Engineer, Punjab (PWD) as Arbitrator. It was further directed by
this Court that Arbitration shall be conducted under the aegis of DIAC.
However, the arbitral proceedings couldn't be completed, as the learned
Arbitrator expired on 04.05.2021.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a substituted Arbitrator
may be appointed to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and prays
that the substituted Arbitrator may not be appointed through DIAC.
7. Learned CGSC appearing on behalf of respondent submits that he has
no objection to the appointment of sole Arbitrator by this Court.
8. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly,
Mr. Justice (Retd.) Vikramjit Sen (Mobile: 8447333366) is appointed
sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties from the stage
where it was left by the earlier Arbitrator.
9. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth
Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
10. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
11. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.
12. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Arbitrator for information.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 07, 2021/rk
