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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 2920

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Appellant
Versus
SWADESH AGROTECH LIMITED – Respondent
ARBA/24/2018



##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:5140-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ARBA No.24 of 2018

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through its Director, Directorate Of Veterinary

Services, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

Appellant (s)

versus

1 - Swadesh Agrotech Limited Through its Director, Shri Sanjeev

Agrawal, C-17, Parijat Commercial Complex, E-5, Arera Colony, Bhopal

(M.P.)

Respondent(s)

For Appellant (s) : Mr. Avinash Singh, GA

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kshitij Sharma and Mr. Kartik Kathuria, Advs

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

Judgment on Board

Per Rajani Dubey J.

30/01/2026

1. This arbitration appeal has been preferred by the State/appellant

against the order dated 14.03.2018 passed by learned

Digitally

Commercial Court (District Level), Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh in

signed

by R

MJC No.20/2017, whereby the application preferred by the

NIRALA

##PAGE2##

2

appellant has been dismissed and the award dated 06.05.2017

passed by the learned sole Arbitrator has been affirmed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant and the respondent

had entered into a contract agreement dated 28.06.2005 and

supplementary agreement dated 11.11.05 for the Improvement,

Design, Construction, Supply, Installation and Commissioning of

Dairy Processing Plants at Raigarh, Ambikapur, Korea,

Kawardha and Jashpur and Chilling Centres at Bharatpur,

Kunkuri and Bagicha on turnkey basis. During the pendency of

the contract, certain disputes arose between the parties. The

respondent invoked arbitration clause 19 of the contract

agreement. The respondent appointed Shri SM Korbu, retired

CE, Water Resources Department as the Sole Arbitrator and

referred the dispute to him for adjudication. The Sole Arbitrator

passed the award on 06.11 2012, the award was challenged by

the applicant before the District Judge, Raipur vide arbitration

case No. 7A/2013 u/s 34 of the Act, 1996. The District Judge,

Raipur set aside the award. The respondent filed application u/s

11(5) of the Act, 1996, before the Hon'ble High Court of

Chhatisgarh. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated

03.12.2014 in Arbitration Appeal No. 17/2014, with a consent of

the parties appointed Shri justice N.K Agrawal, retired judge of

the Hon'ble High Court for the redressal of the disputes between

the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator started arbitration

proceeding and after some proceedings he shown his inability to

##PAGE3##

3

continue further proceedings and resigned. The respondent

again filed a petition No.50/2015 for appointment of a new

arbitrator. The High Court vide order dated 28.10.2015 appointed

advocate Ms. Sharmila Singhai as a Sole Arbitrator to further

arbitrate the disputes between the parties. The learned Sole

Arbitrator passed award on 06.05.2017 in the favour of the

respondent and against the appellant, wherein the learned

Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs. 7,62,91,445/- (Rs. seven crore

sixty two lacs ninety one thousand four hundred forty five only)

with antilite interest @ 12% from 22.03.2015 till the date of award

i.e. 06.05.2017 amounting to Rs.1,93,88,477.00 and also granted

post-lite interest @ 12% per annum from the date of award ie.

06.05.2017 till the realization of whole awarded sum. The said

award dated 06.05.2017 was assailed before the learned

Commercial Court (District Level), Naya Raipur but the same has

been rejected vide impugned order (Annexure-P/1). Hence the

present appeal has been filed by the appellant/State.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/State submits that the

Commercial Court and the Learned Sole Arbitrator failed to

appreciate the fact that the respondent company has breached

the terms and conditions of the agreement (Clause No.24 and 28

(1)) executed between the appellant State and the present

respondent company, as after agreement with the State, the said

respondent company had executed the agreement on

02.08.2006 with one Shri Saleem Ansari S/o Mohammad Sadiq

##PAGE4##

4

Ansari, Resident of Mominpara, Mahamaya Road, Ambikapur,

District Surguja (C.G.) whereby

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