SUJOY PAUL
Cobra Cipl – Appellant
Versus
Chief Project Manager – Respondent
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
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.