M/S Silver Line Construction vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 3403 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Arbitration Application No. 34/2021

M/s Silver Line Construction, B-13, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, New Delhi-
110024
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.      Union Of India, Through Executive Engineer, Jaipur
        Central Division-I, Cpwd, Vidyadhar Nagar Jaipur-302023
2.      The Chief Engineer (Nz-Iii) Cpwd, Nirman Bhawan,
        Sector-10, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan.
                                                                ----Respondents

Connected With S.B. Arbitration Application No. 33/2021 M/s Silver Line Construction, B-13, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, New Delhi- 110024.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through Executive Engineer, Jaipur Central Division-I, Cpwd, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur-302023

2. The Chief Engineer (Nz-Iii) Cpwd, Nirman Bhawan, Sector-10, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Mohit Gupta
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Anand Sharma with Mr.
                               Namandeep Singh

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

28/04/2022

1. These Arbitration Applications have been filed under Section

11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of

sole arbitrator.

(2 of 3) [ARBAP-34/2021]

2. It is contended by counsel for the applicants that there was

certain conditions to be fulfilled before appointing an arbitrator.

Applicants gave a notice to the non-applicants for appointment of

the Dispute Redressal Committee on 21.09.2020 but the said

committee was not constituted. The applicants thereafter issued

various notices to the respondents for appointment of an

arbitrator but no attention was paid to the repeated letters.

3. Counsel for the non-applicants/respondents has no objection

to the appointment of an arbitrator. It is contended that the

applicants did not wait for the mandatory period of ninety days

and prior to that date, sent notices for appointment of an

arbitrator.

4. I have considered the contentions and have perused the

Arbitration Clause.

5. From perusal of the Arbitration Clause it is revealed that the

said clause empowers non-applicants for constituting the Dispute

Redressal Committee. The Dispute Redressal Committee was not

constituted inspite of letter given by the applicants and no

arbitrator was appointed by the non-applicants.

6. This Court deems it proper to invoke Section 11 (6) of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act to adjudicate the dispute between

the parties.

7. This Court appoints Mr. Justice Guman Singh (Retd.) C-254,

Hans Marg Malviya Nagar, Jaipur as an Arbitrator to decide the

dispute.

8. Accordingly, Arbitration Applications stand allowed. The

Arbitrator shall be entitled to lay down fees as provided under

Manual of Procedure for Alternative Disputes Resolution, 2009 as

amended from time to time.

(3 of 3) [ARBAP-34/2021]

9. Registry is directed to intimate Mr. Justice Guman Singh

(Retd.) and obtain his formal consent.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /13-14

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)