SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 9914

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, JJ
M/S BPTP LTD. – Appellant
Versus
M/S YASH CONSTRUCTIONS – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2025 | SLP (C) NO. 8435-8436 OF 2023 | Arb. No. 253 of 2018 (O&M)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Kaushik Poddar, AOR, Mr. Diwakar R Singh, Adv., Mr. Akash Dalal, Adv., Mr. Hanzala Reza, Adv., Mr. Achin Nayak, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakshi, Adv., Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, AOR

The court emphasized the necessity and efficiency of arbitration in resolving ongoing disputes between the parties.

Headnote:The present civil appeal arises from the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which initially allowed the appointment of an arbitrator for dispute resolution. The Supreme Court examined the necessity of arbitration and appointed a sole arbitrator to finalize the dispute, stating, 'the matter can be referred to sole arbitrator as determined by this Court.' Fundamental issues were addressed regarding arbitration proceedings initiated in 2014 with the court underscoring the need for efficient resolution of disputes. The appeal was thus disposed of appropriately, referencing the ongoing arbitration case.

Table of Content
1. background of the case and procedural history. (Para 1 , 2)
2. counsel for both sides presented arguments. (Para 3)
3. court's reasoning on arbitration and dispute resolution. (Para 4)

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the judgment and orders passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Arb. No. 253 of 2018 (O&M) on 21.10.2022, whereby the High Court initially allowed the application ex-parte filed by the respondent under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 (for short, 'the Act') seeking appointment of an arbitrator and subsequently dismissed CM No. 17953-CII of 2022 in ARB No. 253 of 2018 dated 29.03.2023 filed by the appellant for recalling of order dated 21.10.2022.

3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakshi, learned counsel for the respondent.

Signature Not Verified

4. Having considered the matter in detail, we are of the opinion Digitally signed by KAPIL TANDON Date: 2025.10.18

10:56:50 IST Reason:

that this has been an unnecessary litigation between the parties.

All that the respondent seeks is determination of the dispute through arbitration, for which she filed a petition under Section 11 of the Act way back in the year 2014. This Section 11 proceedings continued till date unabated on an enquiry as to the correct seat/venue for arbitration. In order to ensure that there is finality to this issue, we are of the opinion that the matter can be referred to sole arbitrator as determined by this Court.

5. We appoint Mr. Sajan Poovayya, learned Senior Advocate of this Court as the sole arbitrator. The learned arbitrator will fix his fee in consultation with the parties. The venue and seat for arbitration shall be in Delhi.

6. With these observations, the appeals are disposed of.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

…………………………………………………………………………J.

[PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA]

…………………………………………………………………………J.

[ATUL S. CHANDURKAR]

NEW DELHI;

OCTOBER 15, 2025 ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.6 SECTION IV-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8435-8436/2023 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-10-2022 in ARB No. 253/2018 29-03-2023 in CM No. 17953/2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh]

M/S BPTP LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS M/S YASH CONSTRUCTIONS Respondent(s)

Date : 15-10-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Kaushik Poddar, AOR Mr. Diwakar R Singh, Adv.

Mr. Akash Dalal, Adv.

Mr. Hanzala Reza, Adv.

Mr. Achin Nayak, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakshi, Adv.

Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The Civil Appeals are disposed of in terms of the Signed Order.

3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (KAPIL TANDON) (NIDHI WASON)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top