$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 27.03.2026 + ARB.P. 1858/2025 ASHWANI GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Avinash Trivedi & Mr.

Rahul Aggarwal, Advs.

versus DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gyanendra Kumar, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short „the Act‟) for appointment of an arbitrator.

2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was awarded a works contract for upgradation and face-lifting work of a government school at Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Sector-5, New Delhi vide Letter of Acceptance (for short „LoA‟) dated 03.02.2016. The project was to be completed within 240 days but was actually completed on 20.06.2018. Time was extended by the respondent on 12.03.2019 without levying liquidated damages. The final bill was paid on 30.08.2019. On 31.08.2019, the petitioner addressed a communication to the Executive Engineer (SP) stating that claims inter alia for escalation in prices under clauses 10C and 10CA of the contract were pending.

2.1 On 05.12.2023, the petitioner approached the Executive Engineer (SP) in terms of clause 25 of the General Conditions of Contract (for short „GCC‟) however, no response was received. On 19.02.2024, the petitioner addressed a letter to the Chief Project Manager regarding the pending disputes and sought reconciliation. On 04.05.2024, a request was made by the petitioner for formation of a Dispute Redressal Committee (for short „DRC‟) as provided under clause 25 of the GCC. Thereafter, a notice under Section 21 of the Act was issued on 15.07.2024 and hence, the present petition.

3. Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to reproduce the clause 25 of the GCC providing for settlement of dispute through arbitration.

“25. Settlement of Dispute & Arbitration Except where otherwise provided in the Contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, design, drawings and instructions herein 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:

1) If the Contractor considers any work demanded of him to be outside the requirements of the Contract, or disputes and drawings, record or decision given in writing by the Engineer 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 shall give his written instructions or decision within a period of one month 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 the superintending engineer 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 this decision of the Chief Engineer, the contractor may within 30 days from the receipt of the Chief Engineer decision, appeal before the Dispute Redressal Committee (DEC) along with a list of disputes with amounts claimed in respect of each such dispute and