JUDGMENT

K. RAMASWAMY, J. - Leave granted.

2. Having heard the learned senior counsel M/s. P. P. Rao and K. Madhava Reddy on either side and having given our anxious consideration to their contentions, we find in final analysis that the order of the High Court needs no interference. The facts lie in a short compass and are as stated under.

3. The respondent concluded a contract with the appellant on February 11, 1986 to construct a building at a cost of Rs. 1.00 crore. During its execution since differences had arisen the respondent by his letter dated July 27, 1987 requested the administrative head of the appellant to appoint an arbitrator within 15 days from the date of its receipt. On August 8 and 18, 1987 the respondent was informed that the matter was under consideration. His renewed request in letter on August 17, 1987 evoked no action. Finding it futile to wait, on July 7, 1988, the respondent filed O.P. No. 167 of 1988 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, at Nandyal to appoint an arbitrator. The notice was issued to the appellant therein. By letter dated July 27, 1988 the respondent was informed of the appointment of Shri Yethiraj, Superintending Engineer of B.H.E.L., Hyd