Back
YASHWANT VARMA
Adicon Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
ORDER
1. This petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [The Act] seeks the intervention of the Court for constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal. The disputes emanate out of an agreement dated 18 October 2010 for the following work:
"Maintenance of Completed Scheme under NA-II in Rohini Zone for year 2010-11. Sub Head: Clearing and desilting of sewer lines in Rohini Zone from Sector 20 to 24 with Super Sucker Machine (Peripheral lines)".
2. According to the Petitioner, the work was successfully completed on 17 April 2012 and a communication to that effect also issued by the Executive Engineer on 03 August 2013. The Petitioner alleges that despite the above, the Respondent has failed to attend to the Final bill which had been submitted on 27 July 2013 and to release payments in respect thereof. It is the case of the Petitioner that after adjustment of payments received during the currency of the contract, the total amount which was claimed in terms of the Final Bill amounted to Rs.81,24,158/- which was never paid. The Petitioner further asserts that the Respondent had always assured that payments would be duly made and that the claims raised were being e
The main legal point established in the judgment is that failure to follow the prescribed procedure and a claim being hopelessly barred by time can lead to the dismissal of a petition seeking the con....
Arbitration requests must be filed within three years of the cause of action; failure to act in time bars subsequent petitions.
Claims withdrawn do not reset the limitation period; the original cause of action's date governs the timeliness of arbitration requests.
An application under Section 11 for appointment of an arbitrator is time-barred if filed after three years from the refusal to appoint, with delays not justified.
The court upheld the validity of the arbitration agreement and recognized the petitioner’s adherence to the procedural requirements for arbitration, irrespective of the respondent's claims regarding ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of limitation laws and the categorization of cases as dead wood in determining the eligibility for appointment of an arbitrator.
The claims were notified within the stipulated period and submitted along with the final bill in accordance with Clause 6.6.3.0 of the GCC, making the disputes arbitrable under Clause 9.1.0.0.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
