Mohammad Rafiq, J.

1. Applicant M/s. JIL-Aquafil (JV) has filed this application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, inter-alia with the prayer that an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 24.4 of the Contract be appointed for resolution of its dispute with the non-applicant, Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project.

2. Foundational facts essential for deciding the application are that applicant is a joint venture of M/s. Jain Infra Projects Limited and M/s. Aquafil Polymers Company Private Limited. Non-applicant Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project has been created by the Government of Rajasthan for development of infrastructure across the urban centers of the State of Rajasthan. Non-applicant on 28.01.2011 invited tenders to improve infrastructure facilities at Bundi. Applicant submitted its tender and was declared as a successful bidder to "Design, Construction, Supply, Erection, Testing, Commissioning and five years Operation & Maintenance of Sewage Treatment plant having a capacity of 8 MLD including all Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, Pumping and other allied works and Supply, Laying, Joining, Testing and Commissioning of Outfall Sewer, various Trunk sewers, collecting and lateral sewers along with all necessary manholes, appurtenances, etc. at Bundi town", under Contract Package for the accepted contract amount of Rs. 34,73,78,358/-. A letter of acceptance in favour of the applicant was issued by non-applicant on 21.07.2011. In terms thereof, the applicant, from time to time, submitted performance security in the form of four different bank guarantees, each for a sum of Rs. 5,41,21,818/-. The non-applicant issued notice to applicant of work order dated 09.09.2011 and directed it to commence mobilization of the work. According to said notice, date of commencement of the project was 18.08.2011 and date of completion was 17.02.2014. In terms of the tender document, contract agreement (work) and contract agreement (operation and maintenance), both dated 21.09.2011, were executed between the parties. As per Clause 14.1 of Part III of the conditions of contract, the contractor in preparing the bid, was required to rely on the site investigation report, supplemented by any information made available to the bidder. According to the applicant, in terms of sub-clause (dd) of Clause 1 of Section VII i.e. General Condition of Contract, Site Investigation Reports are those that were included in the bidding documents being factual and interpretative reports about the surface and subsurface conditions at the site. Case of applicant is that a clear report was given by non-applicant that entire site was in their possession and that they would able to transfer possession of the site to applicant enabling them to proceed with the execution of work immediately. However, a "Handing over/Taking over of Sites" Note was also required to be prepared in terms of Clause 6.1.10.1 of the tender document, after physically visiting the sites detailing out any hindrances/encroachments, if any. Further, in terms of Clause 6.1.10.2 of the tender document, in case of such hindrances/encroachments, probable dates of removal of hindrances/encroachments were also required to be given by the Project Manager in the said Note, which was required to be jointly signed by the Project Manager as well as the Contractor.

3. Allegation of applicant is that non-applicant failed to provide possession of the required land and the Note of a "Handing over/Taking over of Sites" to them. Even then, non-applicant directed the applicant to proceed with the work with a representation that the project site is free from encroachment/hindrances. Applicant started preliminary works by setting up site office, proceeded for mobilization of manpower, initiated the work for preparation of action plan, initiated the work regarding preparation and approval of equipment design and drawings etc. However, to utter shock and dismay of the appl