SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
KGL Infrastructures - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Arb.P. 982 of 2021
Decided On : 21-12-2021




The court upheld the arbitrability of disputes arising from contractual obligations, appointing a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 11 and Section 12 - Appointment of Arbitrator - Petition filed by a partnership firm for appointment of an arbitrator due to disputes with the Union of India over railway contracts and unpaid claims - Petition allowed, and a sole arbitrator appointed to adjudicate disputes. (Paras 1, 4, 7)

(B) Disputes were deemed arbitrable and the existing invocation of arbitration clauses confirmed. (Paras 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was engaged in the business of construction and contracted to provide limited height subways under specific railway contracts that were extended due to various delays. After numerous unsuccessful payment requests, the petitioner invoked arbitration.

Findings of Court:
The petition was allowed and the Senior Advocate was appointed as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes.

Issues: Whether the disputes arising from the contract were arbitrable and whether an arbitrator should be appointed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court confirmed the arbitrability of the disputes and recognized the invocation of the arbitration clause based on failure to meet contractual obligations.

Result: Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. dispute arose from contract execution delays. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitioner seeks arbitration appointment. (Para 5 , 6)
3. arbitrator appointed under arbitration act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. court order for arbitration conclusion. (Para 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Arbitrator on behalf of respondent to adjudicate the disputes with respondent. Pertinently, petitioner is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of construction and undertakes railway contracts.

2. According to petitioner, it was awarded work for providing of limited height sub way in place of U/M L-xing no.35 at km. 38/4-4, 37 at km.40/4-5 and 39 at km. 41/5-6 under railway track between KEX-BTU section on DSA-SMQL section under ADEN/SMQL vide acceptance letter dated 30.05.2017 for Rs.4,73,51,203/- and stipulated date of completion of work was 6 months i.e. 30.11.2017. All arrangements were made for execution of work but due to late sanctioning of block for placing of pre-casted RCC boxes, substantial increase in the scope of work, late decisions, increase in cost, non-availability of funds, late sanctioning of Addendum & Corrigendum, the work was extended upto 29.02.2020.

3. Thereafter, petitioner reminded the concerned department about the preparation of final bill but it kept on evading on one pretext or the other. Petitioner again made several requests to consider making payments qua the items not paid in the final bill but the same did not fetch any result.

4. According to petitioner, due to failure of the obligations of respondent, petitioner issued letter dated 02.08.2021 invoking Arbitration as contained under clause 64 of the General conditions of the Contract, calling upon the respondent to make the payment of the claims of the petitioner and constitute the Arbitration Tribunal. In response thereto, respondent asked for a waiver under section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Hence, the present petition has been filed.

5. During hearing, learned counsel for petitioner prays that sole Arbitrator may be appointed to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

6. Learned counsel for respondent has objected to the averments made in the present petition however, has submitted that the disputes are arbitrable.

7. In view of the above the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Senior Advocate (Mobile: 9810021863) is appointed sole Arbitrator in this petition to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

8. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

9. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.

10. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

11. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Arbitrator for information.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top