Delhi High Court
Sap Electro Contracts (Pvt) Ltd vs The Reiyukai on 11 February, 2022
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 11.02.2022
+ ARB.P. 34/2022
SAP ELECTRO CONTRACTS (PVT) LTD ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Syed Hasan Isfahani, Adv.
versus
THE REIYUKAI ..... Respondent
Through Mr.Abhijit Banerjee & Mr.Nitin
Chopra, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (oral)
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to
adjudicate the disputes inter-se the parties.
2. According to petitioner, respondent was awarded the work order for
Internal Electrical Works for Institutional Religious Building "Eternal
Oasis" for total amount of Rs.82,60,000/- inclusive of all taxes e.g. Labour
Cess, WCT & GST as applicable on the basis of Schedule of Rates enclosed
with the work order for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of
Internal Electrical Works at the project site and a Contract Agreement was
signed with all terms and conditions including BOQ. Petitioner claims to
have started the said work according to the specification as per BOQ and
satisfaction of respondent's consulting Engineers/Project Managers and
thereafter drawings were made final from respondent's side and
mobilization advance received. Thereafter on 18.04.2018, respondent
awarded new work order to the petitioner for supply, installation, testing and
commissioning of High Side Electrical Works Institutional Religious
Building "Eternal Oasis" for total amount of Rs.44,25,000/- exclusive of
GST and Labour Cess and contract agreement was also signed with all terms
and conditions including BOQ. Again, petitioner started the said work
according to the specification as per BOQ and satisfaction of respondent's
consulting Engineers/Project Managers and thereafter drawings were made
final from respondent's side and mobilization advance received. After the
start of work, respondent started providing fresh drawings for those work
which was already completed and directed the petitioner to dismantle
everything and again carry out the work order according to the new
drawings. Petitioner did so for which respondent paid extra to the petitioner.
Petitioner raised the running bills for both the work order and paid the GST
as per applicable rate and respondent certified the payment and released part
payments.
3. Suddenly, on 20.05.2021, respondent terminated the contract in
violation of the terms and conditions of the GCC clause and work order.
Petitioner contacted the respondent and demanded the payment of
outstanding amount, however, respondent refused to pay the same.
Subsequently, various disputes arose between the parties regarding illegal
termination of the contract/work orders and non-payments of outstanding
against the certified invoices/bills.
4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that petitioner sent a letter to respondent on 18.10.2021 requesting
to settle the disputes and differences amicably as per clause 52 of GCC but
of no avail. Thereafter, petitioner sent a legal notice dated 02.11.2021 and
invoked the arbitration in terms of clause 52.1 of GCC and called upon the
respondent to file application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 before this Court for appointment of sole arbitrator.
However, respondent neither replied nor filed any application. Hence, the
present petition has been filed.
5. During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondent has not opposed the present petition and submitted that the
claims raised in the present petition are disputed, however, fairly conceded
that the disputes inter se parties are arbitrable. Learned counsel also
submitted that respondent has no objection if disputes are referred to an
independent arbitrator appointed by this Court.
6. Since counsel representing both the sides have consented that the
disputes are arbitrable and an independent Arbitrator be appointed by this
Court, the present petition is allowed.
7. Accordingly, Mr. R.K. Dhawan, Advocate (Mobile: 9899775330) is
appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the
parties.
8. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth
Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
9. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
10. The present petition and pending application, if any, are accordingly
disposed of.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 11, 2022/ab
