[2026:RJ-JD:11641]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Arbitration Application No. 40/2025 M/s Vraj And Vaj Constructions, Through Its Partner Cum Authorized Signatory Priyank V Patel, Aged About 35 Years, Having Its Office At A/20, Indradeep Society, Opp Tulsi Optic, Vikas Gruh Road, Patel Colony, Street No. 1, Jamnagar- 361001.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through Engineer-In-Chief, Integrated Headquarter Of Ministery Of Defence (Army), Kashmir House, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi 110011

2. The Chief Engineer, Jodhpur Zone, Military Engineer Services, Echs Complex, Opposite Military Hospital, Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. Himanshu Choudhary Mr. Pradhyuman Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kirta Ram Meghwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

10/03/2026

1. The present application has been filed by the applicant – M/s Vraj & Vaj Constructions, a partnership firm constituted under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, “the Act of 1996”), seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes arising out of Contract No. CEJZ/BRD/06 of 2015–16 pertaining to the work of “PROVN OF OTM ACCN AT MAKARPURA (PH-II) BARODA”.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is engaged in the business of providing construction services for government organizations across the country and has executed various infrastructure projects.

4. It is submitted that in the year 2015, the respondent authorities invited bids for the aforesaid work. The applicant participated in the tender process and was declared L-1. Accordingly, the contract, valued at Rs. 16,44,89,821.42, was awarded in favour of the applicant vide letter dated 02.06.2015, and a formal agreement bearing Contract No. CEJZ/BRD/06 of

2015–16 was executed between the parties.

5. It is further submitted that as per the terms of the contract, the stipulated period for completion of the work was 18 months. The work order fixed the date of commencement and completion as 21.06.2015 and 20.12.2016 respectively.

6. It is submitted that due to reasons attributable to the respondents, the execution of the work was delayed, and extensions of time were granted. The work was ultimately completed on 30.07.2018.

7. Learned counsel submits that several Deviation Orders (DOs) were not finalized during the execution of the work and were issued belatedly, the last of which was issued on 22.06.2021.

8. It is further submitted that the contract was transferred from the Chief Engineer, Jodhpur Zone to the Chief Engineer, Bhopal Zone in August 2015 and was subsequently transferred back to the Chief Engineer, Jodhpur Zone in July 2019.

9. It is submitted that the applicant raised its final bill on 15.07.2019 for an amount of Rs. 45,63,744.49; however, the same was not paid, allegedly in violation of the contractual conditions.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that various disputes have arisen between the parties, including non-payment of the final bill, delayed payments, losses due to escalation, prolongation of the contract, idle resources, and other claims arising out of execution of the work.

11. It is further submitted that since grievances of the applicant were not addressed, resulted in invocation of arbitration vide notice dated 12.12.2022 in terms of Condition 70 of the General Conditions of Contract (IAFW-2249), calling upon the respondents to appoint an arbitrator.

12. It is submitted that despite repeated communications, including letters dated 12.12.2022 and 22.12.2023, the respondents failed to appoint an arbitrator in accordance with the agreed procedure.

13. Learned counsel submits that the respondents, vide communication dated 08.06.2023, denied the claims of the applicant, inter alia, on the ground that the applicant had signed a “No Further Claim Certificate” and that the claims were not mai