The court upheld the Doctrine of Severability and Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle, affirming the independence of the arbitration clause from the main contract and the competence of the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction and the validity of the arbitration agreement.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1996") seeking the appointment of a sole Arbitrator and inter alia praying as under:

"a. appoint an independent and impartial Sole Arbitrator, in terms of the Dispute Resolution clause, as contained in the contract-Agreement and the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; so as to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties to the present petition;

b. grant costs of this application; and/or

c. Pass such further order/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents." Factual Matrix

2. The petitioner is a partnership firm having its registered office at shop No. 452, 1st Floor, New Grain Market, Karnal, Haryana-132001. The petitioner is a listed Class-1/(A) 'Contractor., primarily dealing with civil construction works, with Government departments. The respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Jangpura, New Delhi-110014, functioning under the administrative control of the Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, Government of India.

3. On 22nd October, 2018, the respondent, issued a 'Letter of Award. to the petitioner vis-a-vis work related to "Construction of pre-fabricated shelter for homeless persons at different places in Haryana" for the revised/accepted rate of Rs. 16,37,69,289/-, inclusive of all taxes. The time period for completion of the work was fixed at two months. Pursuant to the Letter of Award, the petitioner furnished an irrevocable and unconditional Performance Bank Guarantee, amounting to Rs. 81,88,465/- to the respondent and thereafter, an Agreement was signed between the petitioner and the respondent on 16th November, 2018. The relevant terms and conditions of the Agreement are enlisted as follows:

• Article 1.1 delineates the scope of work.
• Article 2 sets out the 'Contract-Documents'.
• Article 5, thereof, postulates and declares that the agreement shall be governed by and be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of India and gives exclusive jurisdiction to Delhi court(s) only.

4. The work could not be completed within stipulated time periodas envisaged in the Agreement. Thereafter, the petitioner had completed the entire work as per the terms and conditions of the Agreement and obtained the Completion Certificate dated 27th July, 2021. The petitioner made a claim, including final bill, Performance Bank Guarantees and security deposit in terms of the above said Agreement, however, the respondent denied the said claims entirely.

5. Being aggrieved by the acts of the respondent, the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause, i.e. Clause 26 of the Special Conditions of Contract (hereinafter referred to as 'the SCC') vide letter dated 19th February, 2022 under Section 21 of the Act, 1996, pertaining to "Settlement of Disputes and Arbitration". Along with this letter, the petitioner appended a Statement of Claims in respect of the amounts, which is reproduced hereunder:

6. The respondent did not reply to the said notice dated 19th February, 2022 and/or act in accordance with the terms of Clause 26 of the SCC. Thereafter on 15th July, 2022, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 11 of the Act,