Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
K.B.G Engineers – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Tourism & Transportation Development Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the arbitration petition (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. court's order for arbitrator appointment (Para 8 , 13 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. arguments against arbitration due to final payment and non-compliance (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. conclusion: petition allowed for arbitration (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
1. A petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed for appointment of an Arbitrator.
2. The facts in brief as narrated in the petition are that the petitioner a registered partnership firm, was awarded the Tender vide Acceptance Letter bearing No. DTTDC/ENGG/I(196)/EE(PB)-III/135 dated 12th June, 2015 awarding the work to the petitioner. A Performance Guarantee of Rs.22,05,696/- in the shape of Bank Guarantee dated 17th June, 2015 and of Rs.6,35,000/- dated 18th June, 2015, were submitted. The Letter of Commencement of Work dated 19th June, 2015 was issued in favour of the petitioner. The Agreement bearing No. 02/EE(PB)-III/DTTDC/ENGG/2015-16 for execution of work for total contract amount of Rs.44,11,391/- was issued. The stipulated date of commencement of work was 27th June, 2015 and completion was 23rd Decembe
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 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....
The court ruled that jurisdiction under Section 11(6A) is limited to assessing the existence and validity of arbitration agreements, with unresolved factual disputes requiring arbitration.
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.
The failure to constitute a Dispute Resolution Board justifies the appointment of an Arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, affirming the need for timely resolution of disputes arisin....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputed claims between parties in accordance with Section 11(6) of the Arbitration an....
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - Court is not required to examine any other contentious issues regarding the disputes between the parties at the stage of referring the parties to arbitration....
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 court affirmed that when parties acknowledge disputes in a contractual agreement, an arbitrator must be appointed to resolve these disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
