Rajasthan High Court
Agribiotech Industries Limited vs Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar ... on 19 May, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Arbitration Application No. 68/2020
Agribiotech Industries Limited, Having Its Registered Office At
SP-156, RIICO, Industrial Area, Ajitgarh District Sikar (Raj)
Through Its Director Ashutosh Bajoria S/o Sh.Shrigopal Bajoria.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Limited, Fourth
Floor, Nehru Sahakar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road,
Jaipur Rajasthan Through Its General Manager.
2. Director-In-Charge, Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar
Mills Limited, Fourth Floor, Nehru Sahakar Bhawan,
Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Order
19/05/2022
1. This Arbitration Application has been filed under Section
11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of
an Arbitrator.
2. It is contended by counsel for the applicant that there
is an Arbitration Clause in the Notice Inviting Tender. As per the
Arbitration Clause, in case of any dispute arising out of any matter
related to the tender/contract/agreement, the matter will be
referred to Sole Arbitrator appointed by Director-in-Charge,
RSGSML whose decision shall be final and binding on both the
parties. The place of arbitration shall be Jaipur. The fees and other
expenses of the Arbitrator shall be borne by both the parties
(2 of 3) [ARBAP-68/2020]
equally. It is further contended that the dispute arose between the
parties and notice was served by the claimant on 20.05.2020
requesting the Director In charge to appoint an independent or
impartial Arbitrator who should have no relation with any of the
parties. It is further contended that no reply to the said notice was
given by the non-applicant and sole Arbitrator was not appointed.
It is contended that since the parties have failed to act as required
under the Arbitration Clause, the Court can appoint an Arbitrator
in terms of Sub-Clause 6 of Clause 11 of Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter called as 'Act').
3. Counsel for the applicant further contends that in
Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Ors. Vs HSCC(India) Ltd.
AIR 2020 SC 59, it was held by the Apex Court that a person
who is debarred from being appointed as an Arbitrator cannot
appoint an Arbitrator. Reliance is also placed reliance on TRF Ltd.
Vs Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. (2017) 8 SCC 377.
4. Counsel for the non-applicant has opposed the
arbitration application. It is contended that the rates were fixed in
the subject of terms and conditions in procurement of country
liquor document and since goods were purchased by the
respondent, benefit, if any, in increase in price could not be
passed on to the applicants.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. The objection with regard to rates being fixed and the
material being purchased by the respondents prior to increase in
rates and thus, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of the
revised price is the subject matter of dispute which has to be
finally adjudicated by the arbitrator and cannot be adjudicated by
the Court.
(3 of 3) [ARBAP-68/2020]
7. In the judgment of the Apex Court TRF Ltd. Vs
Energo Engineering Projects Ltd.(Supra) further elaborated
by the Apex Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Ors.
Vs HSCC(India) Ltd.(Supra) Perkins Eastman Architects
DPC & Ors. Vs HSCC(India) Ltd, wherein it was specifically held
that the person who has an interest in the outcome or decision of
the dispute, must not have the power to appoint a sole Arbitrator
and that has to be taken as the essence of the amendments
brought in by the Arbitration and Conciliation(Amendment) Act,
2015. This Court, therefore, deems it proper to appoint the
Arbitrator and invoke the power under Section 11(6) of the Act of
1996. This Court appoints Hon'ble Justice Mr. J.R. Goyal(Retired)
T-1, Paliwal Park Near Sanghi Farm, Tonk Road, Jaipur, as an
Arbitrator to decide the dispute.
8. The arbitration application stands 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.
9. Registry is directed to intimate Justice Mr. J.R. Goyal
(Retd.) and obtain his formal consent.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
CHANDAN /1
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
