S.N. Aggarwal, J.

1. These are four applications filed for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11

(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. All these applications are proposed to be decided by this common order because question of facts and law involved in all of them are identical.

3. Briefly stated the facts of these four cases are as follow:

4. The MCD had awarded a contract to the applicant for improvement of Footpath in Patparganj Society in AC-43, Shahdara Zone vide work order No. 537 dated 20.02.1998. The tender amount was Rs. 15,06,513/- and the contract amount was Rs.44,51,745/-. The work was to be completed within five months. As per the applicant, the contract work was completed within the stipulated time period of five months where after the work was inspected by the officials of the MCD and measurements were taken in the Measurements Book. The applicant has alleged that the respondents have not made the final payment despite his representations dated 08.05.2003 and 05.05.2005. The applicant is stated to has sent a legal notice dated 18.09.2006 to the respondents demanding arbitration for adjudication of disputes regarding final payment but the respondents are stated to have not responded to the said legal notice and thereforee, the applicant has filed an application under Section 11(6) for appointment of an arbitrator in terms of the arbitration clause contained in the work order.

5. The respondents had awarded a contract to the applicant described as CC Channel Back Lines, Blocks A & B, Surajmal Vihar, C-80, Shahdara Zone vide work order No. 434 dated 12.01.1998. The tender amount was Rs. 4,83,326/- and the contract amount was Rs. 4,97,830/-. In terms of contract between the parties, the work was to be completed within five months from the date of the work order. As per the applicant, he had completed the work within the stipulated time period of five months but the respondents did not make final payment under the said contract. The applicant sent a legal notice to the respondents on 18.09.2006 and demanded appointment of an arbitrator but the respondents did not respond to the said notice and thereforee he has filed the present application for appointment of an arbitrator in terms of work order No. 434 dated 12.01.1998 for adjudication of disputes regarding final payment and return of security under the said work order.

.6. The respondents had awarded a contract to the applicant for construction of Link Road in Saket, Block C-72 in Shahdara Zone vide work order No. 46 dated 09.06.2000. This work was for an amount of Rs. 1,79,117/- and was to be completed within two months of the date of the order. As per the applicant, he had completed the work within the stipulated time period of two months but the respondents did not make his final payment and thereforee he sent a legal notice dated 12.06.2007 to the respondents and demanded appointment of an arbitrator. Since the respondents did not respond to his aforementioned legal notice, he filed the present petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator for adjudication of disputes under the above referred work order.

7. The respondents had awarded a contract to the applicant for improvement of Link Road from Main Mandawali Road to Moni Baba Mandir, New Chowk, Bhim House in Saket Block C-72 in Shahdara Zone vide work order No. 387 dated 01.01.2001. The tender amount was Rs. 1,98,171/- and the contract amount was Rs. 2,14,352/-. The work under the said work order was to be completed within two months. As per the applicant, he had completed the work within the stipulated time period of two months but the respondents did not make his final payment under the said work order and thereforee he sent a legal notice dated 25.07.2007 to the respondents calling upon them to appoint an arbitrator for adjudication of disputes relating to final payment and since the respondents failed to respond to the said legal notice, the petitioner filed the present petition