ORDER

The applicant has filed the present application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1996' for the sake of brevity) for appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute arose between the parties in terms of Agreement/Contract -Annexure A/2.

2. It is the case of the applicant that in 2024, the non-applicant issued an RFP for “Old Waste Remediation through Bioremediation, Biomining and Disposal of Residual Waste with Processing and Disposal of Fresh Waste” at Adampur Chawni, Bhopal (“Project Site”), along with subsequent addenda. The Applicant was declared as a successful bidder for both legacy and fresh waste vide Letter of Intimation dated 03.10.2024 (“LOI”) pursuant to which the applicant and the non-applicant executed the contract , copies whereof are collectively filed as Annexure A/2.

3. Pursuant to award of the contract and handing over of the Project Site, the applicant faced persistent infrastructural deficiencies attributable to non-applicant. Despite repeated representations, the deficiencies, including damaged tipping floor, absence of windrow platform, inadequate sheds, drainage and internal roads, damaged boundary walls and landfill-related issues, remained unresolved, causing disruption of operations and daily financial losses to the applicant.

4. It is submitted that a dispute also arose regarding the quantity of legacy waste. Although the RFP estimated 2,50,000 MT, the quantity was to be determined through a contour survey. The non-applicant appointed MANIT vide letter dated 21.10.2024. The applicant informed non-applicant on 13.11.2024 that the survey had assessed the quantity at approximately 10,63,000 MT and that the Applicant had paid Rs. 2,95,000 towards survey charges. However, without communicating the final quantity, the non- applicant cancelled MANIT’s appointment on 17.12.2024 without assigning any reason.

5. It is submitted that meanwhile, the non-applicant failed to rectify the infrastructural deficiencies or to resolve the dispute regarding the quantity of legacy waste. The applicant was consequently incurring continuous losses and additional expenditure to maintain operations. Further, substantial amounts towards processing of fresh waste remained unpaid.

6. It is submitted in these circumstances, the applicant issued an Intent to Terminate Letter dated 07.07.2025, calling upon non-applicant to cure the contractual breaches within 15 days. As on that date, Rs.4,34,68,776/- remained outstanding towards invoices for processing of fresh waste.

7. It is submitted that despite expiry of the stipulated 15-day period and continued inaction on the part of non-applicant, the applicant was constrained to terminate the Contract vide Termination Notice dated22.07.2025

8. Pursuant to the Termination Notice, the applicant informed non-applicant that the Project Site would be handed over and its machinery, equipment and manpower would be removed. Accordingly, vide letter dated 24.07.2025, the Applicant formally handed over the Project Site along with the materials lying therein.

9. It is submitted that non-applicant vide letter dated 21.07.2025 received by the applicant on 29.07.2025 denied the breaches alleged by the applicant. The Applicant duly replied vide letter dated 08.08.2025, rebutting the allegations and reiterating its case. Thereafter, non-applicant issued a termination letter dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure A/17), received by the Applicant on 13.08.2025, whereby non-applicant disputed the applicant’s lawful termination, alleged breaches on the part of the applicant and sought to impose penalties and deductions which were arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the Contract.

10. It is submitted that thereafter, non-applicant threatened to invoke the applicant’s bank guarantee, compelling applicant to approach this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 32149/2025. Vide order dated 14.08.2025 (Annexure A/18), this Hon’ble Court stayed the invocatio