Cobra Cipl vs Chief Project Manager

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(MP) 627

SUJOY PAUL
Cobra Cipl – Appellant
Versus
Chief Project Manager – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Shashank Verma.
For the Respondent: Shri Atul Choudhary.

JUDGMENT :

SUJOY PAUL, J.

1. In this application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the applicant has prayed for appointment of arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute between the parties which as per the applicant has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this bench. The interesting conundrum in this case is based on Clause 1.2.54 (k) of the Agreement entered into between the parties. Since, the said clause talks about venue and makes it clear that venue for an arbitrator shall be the place from which the letter of acceptance of tender is issued (Allahabad) or such other place as the purchaser (Railways) at his discretion may determine, the stand of respondents is that this Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain present application.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that tender was floated in February, 2013. The applicants original offer dated 30.4.2013 was followed by negotiated offer dated 13.11.2013. On 15.11.2014, Annexure A-4, the letter of acceptance was issued by the respondent from Allahabad. The document dated 30.4.2014 shows that contract was entered into between the parties at Jabalpur. The work

Click Here to Read the rest of this document