ARBAP/26/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 2243 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI

           ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2022

                            22nd July, 2022

Between:

Anand Singh Danu                           ...... Applicant/Petitioner

and

State of Uttarakhand & others             ......        Respondents



Counsel for the applicant     :     Mr. Mahesh C. Pant, learned
                                    counsel

Counsel for the respondent    :     Mr.   B.S.     Parihar, learned
                                    Standing Counsel with Ms. Pooja
                                    Banga, learned Brief Holder for
                                    the State / respondents




The Court made the following:


JUDGMENT:

The applicant has preferred the present

application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, to seek appointment of a sole Arbitrator

to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between

the parties in relation to and under the Contract No. 05-

S.E.-Baghe.-2019 dated 09.09.2019, to complete the

Karuli Band to Gajjali, Bijoriya Village motor-marg in

Kapkot constituency of Bageshwar District under State

sector chainage (0.00 km. to 5.00 km.) total length

5.000 km.

2) The case of the applicant is that the work had

to be completed by 08.12.2020, but due to COVID-19

pandemic, the applicant could not complete the work

within time. The respondents terminated the contract on

22.04.2022, and forfeited the security of the applicant

while imposing penalty upon the applicant. The

applicant is aggrieved by the same and has raised

certain disputes which have arisen between the parties

under the contract.

3) The agreement between the parties contains

the procedure for settlement of disputes, firstly, through

an Adjudicator and, if that does not succeed, through an

Arbitrator. The relevant clauses of the agreement are

Clauses 23 and 24. The applicant sought the

appointment of an Adjudicator. The respondents,

however, did not appoint an Adjudicator. Consequently,

the applicant invoked the arbitration agreement on

12.05.2022. The respondents have, however, not

responded to the said notice. Consequently, the

applicant has preferred this application.

4) Despite opportunities, no response has been

filed by the respondents, and consequently, I proceed to

dispose of the arbitration application.

5) The respondents do not dispute the existence

of the arbitration agreement between the parties as

contained in the contract aforesaid.

6) Aforesaid being the position, I am inclined to

allow this Arbitration Application, and accordingly,

appoint Mr. Justice Irshad Hussain, (Retd.) Judge,

Uttarakhand High Court, to act as a sole Arbitrator to

adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out

of the aforesaid agreement.

7) The Arbitration Application stands disposed of

in the aforesaid terms.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

Dt: 22nd July, 2022 Negi