UNITED TRANSPORT Vs. GENERAL MANAGER, THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (CONSTRUCTION), DY. CHIEF ENGINEER (WEST)(CONSTRUCTION) SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY AND THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (WEST)(CONSTRUCTION) SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER entered into a contract with the respondents on 18.07.2007 as per Annexure -P2 for transportation of sleepers. Since the respondents committed breach of agreement, petitioner invoked arbitration clause 64(3)(a)(i) of the agreement and got issued a notice on 24.09.2011 as per Annexure -P7. Respondents by their reply dated 16.11.2011, Annexure -P8 refused to give consent for appointment of Arbitrator. Therefore, the petitioner is before this court. The agreement between the parties as per Annexure -P2 is not in dispute. This agreement provides for appointment of arbitrator under clause 64(3). Since the claim of petitioner is more than Rupees ten lakhs they demanded the respondents as per their notice, Annexure -P7 dated 24.09.2011 for appointment of arbitrator. Now that respondents have denied for appointment of an arbitrator, it is necessary for this court to appoint an arbitrator in terms of clause 64(3)(a)(ii) which reads as under: