$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 19.01.2026 + ARB.P. 127/2024 M/S ASHA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD THROUGH SHRI VARINDER KUMAR SHARMA DIRECTOR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Adv.

versus HINDUSTAN PREFAB LTD & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Varun Nischal & Ms. Saira Tagra, Advs. for R-1.

Mr. Shekhar Raj Sharma, Additional Advocate General, State of Haryana with Ms. Nidhi Narwal & Ms. Srishti Jain, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL)

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Act, for the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon a commercial dispute between the parties.

Signature Not Verified

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has approached this Court invoking Clause 26 of the Special Conditions of Contract [“SCC”] read with Clause 25 of the General Condition of Contract [“GCC”].

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is no requirement to follow the pre-arbitration procedure which is set out in Clause 25 of the GCC. The said clause is reproduced as under:

“SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES AND ARBITRATION Except where otherwise provided in the contract, all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, design, drawings and instructions here-in before mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works or the execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work or after the cancellation, termination, completion or abandonment thereof shall be dealt with as mentioned hereinafter:

(i) If the contractor considers any work demanded of him to be outside the requirements of the contract, or disputes any drawings, record or decision given in writing by the Engineer-in-Charge on any matter in connection with or arising out of the contract or carrying out of the work, to be unacceptable, he shall promptly within 15 days request the Superintending Engineer in writing for written instruction or decision. Thereupon, the Superintending Engineer shall give his written instructions or decision within a period of thirty days from the receipt of the contractor‟s letter.

If the Superintending Engineer fails to give his instructions or decision in writing within the aforesaid period or if the contractor is dissatisfied with the instructions or decision of the Superintending Engineer, the contractor may, within 15 days of the receipt of Superintending Engineer‟s decision, appeal to the Chief Engineer who shall afford an opportunity to the contractor to be heard, if the latter so desires, and to offer evidence in support of his appeal. The Chief Engineer shall give his decision within 30 days of receipt of contractor‟s appeal. If the contractor is dissatisfied with the decision of the Chief Engineer, the Signature Not Verified contractor may within 30 days from the receipt of the Chief Engineer decision, appeal before the Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) along with a list of disputes with amounts claimed in respect of each such dispute and giving reference to the rejection of his disputes by the Chief Engineer. The Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) shall give his decision within a period of 90 days from the receipt of Contractor‟s appeal. The constitution of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) shall be as indicated in Schedule „F‟. If the Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) fails to give his decision within the aforesaid period or any party is dissatisfied with the decision of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC), then either party may within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the decision of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC),