IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 22.01.2026 M/s Shinryo Suvidha Engineers India Pvt. Ltd. --Petitioner Versus Cosmas Research Lab Ltd. --Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI.

Present:- Mr. Kartik Rai, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nitin Thatai, Advocate for respondent.

***

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI.J (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an independent Arbitrator.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits while giving facts of the case that there was an agreement (Annexure P-2) between the petitioner and the respondent, wherein there is an arbitration clause at paragraph no.5.3.15, which is reproduced as under:-

“ ARBITRATION:

Except where otherwise provided in the Contract, all questions and disputes, relating to the meaning of specifications, designs, drawings and instructions here in before mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as arising, out of or relating to the Contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or those conditions concerning the works, or the execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work or after the completion or abandonment thereof shall be referred to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Cancellation Act, 1996 or any Statutory modification or re-enactment thereof and the rules made there under and for the time being in force.

APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL & COSTS OF PROCEEDINGS:

Such arbitration shall be conducted by an arbitral tribunal of three arbitrators. one arbitrator will be appointed by the contractor and one will be appointed by the Employer. Both these arbitrators shall be members of the institution of Engineers (India). The two appointed arbitrators shall appoint a third arbitrator who shall act as the presiding arbitrator. The third arbitrator shall be a fellow of the ASHRAE/ISHRAE. The cost of appointment of the third arbitrators (Presiding Arbitrator) and cost of proceeding shall be shared equally by both the parties.

The Arbitration Tribunal so appointed shall proceed with arbitration at the place to be decided by the tribunal and shall be appropriate for hearing witness experts or the parties & for inspection of goods, documents or property.”

3. Counsel submitted that when a dispute arose between the parties, the respondent instead of invoking the arbitration clause, filed a civil suit for mandatory injunction and for recovery of damages before learned Additional District Judge, Commercial Court, Ludhiana. In the aforesaid civil suit, the petitioner did not file any application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act but at the same time, he had taken specific objection in the written statement that when there is an arbitration clause, the civil suit was not maintainable. However, he also filed an application for treating the aforesaid objection as a preliminary objection but the same was rejected by leaned Additional District Judge and thereafter the petitioner assailed the aforesaid order by which his application for dismissal of civil suit was rejected by filing a civil revision petition before this Court. This Court in CR-6249-2016, which has been attached with the reply as Annexure R-2, dismissed the same. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred SLP (Civil) No.28166-2017, which was also dismissed vide order Annexure R-3. Thereafter, the civil suit commenced and ultimately vide judgement dated 04.09.2024 (Annexure P-6) the civil suit was dismissed only on the ground of maintainability because of the existence of an arbitration clause and the civil suit was not decided on merits but was dismissed only because of the aforesaid reason. Counsel has referred to paragraph no.17 of the aforesaid judgement, which reads as under:-

“17 Learned counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that the matter with regard to t