Wednesday, 03, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nkc Constructins Pvt. Ltd vs Punjab Small Industries And Export ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 5567 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5567 P&H
Judgement Date : 12 March, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Nkc Constructins Pvt. Ltd vs Punjab Small Industries And Export ... on 12 March, 2024

Author: Suvir Sehgal

Bench: Suvir Sehgal

                             Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:028973



ARB-290-2023 (O&M)                                            -1-


                             Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:028973

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

264                                        ARB-290-2023 (O&M)
                                           Date of Decision:12.03.2024



NKC Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
                                                            ... Petitioner


                                     Vs


Punjab Small Industries & Export
Corporation Ltd. and another

                                                        .... Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present: Mr. P.S. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

          Ms. Madhu Dayal, Advocate for the respondents.

                                 ***

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)

1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 11(6) of

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act'),

petitioner has approached this Court for appointment of a sole

Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was

allotted work of 'construction of cement concrete road in Phase VIII,

Industrial Focal Point, Ludhiana' vide letter of acceptance dated

28.01.2020, Annexure A-2. He submits that in terms of letter

Annexure A-2, petitioner deposited the performance security and the

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:028973

ARB-290-2023 (O&M) -2-

contract was entered into between the parties. He submits that clause

25 of the general conditions of contract contains an arbitration clause.

He submits that the work was completed on 15.09.2021 and the

petitioner requested the respondents to release the retention money

and also raised some claims, which was rejected by the respondents

vide letter dated 21.09.2022, Annexure A-14. He submits that as

dispute arose between the parties, by letter dated 07.10.2022,

Annexure A-16, petitioner invoked the arbitration clause while

simultaneously requesting the respondents to release the performance

security. He submits that as the respondents assured that the

performance security will be released and on their asking, by letter

dated 08.11.2022, Annexure A-18 petitioner withdrew letter Annexure

A-16. Counsel submits that thereafter, the entire amount of

performance security was released but as the other claims remained

pending, petitioner revived the letter, Annexure A-16 by serving

notice dated 19.03.2023, Annexure A-19, which was rejected and

rather a show cause notice, Annexure A-21 was issued to the

petitioner for blacklisting.

3. Upon notice, response has been filed by the respondents

contesting the claim wherein it has been submitted that after

withdrawing the invocation letter, petitioner could not revive it.

4. I have heard counsel for the parties and have considered

their respective submissions.

5. Narration of the facts given by the parties show that neither

the contract nor the arbitration clause has been denied. The objection

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:028973

ARB-290-2023 (O&M) -3-

raised by the respondents is that the claims have been settled and after

having withdrawn the invocation letter, the petitioner cannot re-agitate

the claim. As to whether the claim stands satisfied and as to whether

the withdrawal was voluntary, are matters which lie within the domain

of the Arbitrator. They do not require any examination from this Court

at this stage. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the judgment of

the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Parmar Construction

Company, 2019 (5) R.C.R. (Civil) 302.

6. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the

prayer made in the petition deserves to be acceded to.

7. Petition is allowed.

8. Mr. Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, (Retd.), Former Judge

of Punjab and Haryana High Court, House No. 123, Sector 8,

Chandigarh, Mobile Nos. 7837049208, 9815308888, is requested to

act as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties,

subject to compliance of statutory requirements.

9. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Arbitrator on

date, time and place to be fixed by the Arbitrator at his convenience.

10. Needless to mention, parties will be at liberty to raise all the

claims/defences/counter claims/pleas before the Arbitrator.

11. A request letter along with a copy of this order be sent to Mr.

Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa (Retd.)

12.03.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL) pooja saini JUDGE

Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

3 of 3

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter