CHABBRAS ASSOCIATES Vs. HSCC INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties with respect to the Contract dtd. 18/9/2018 for Construction of Phase-II works comprising Director's Residence, Type II, III, IV and V Residential quarters for National Institute of Animal Biotechnology (NIAB) at Hyderabad.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present petition is premature as the petitioner has not followed the procedure prescribed for appointment of an Arbitrator. Drawing reference to Clause 25 of the General Conditions of Contract (in short, the 'GCC'), he submits that prior to invoking arbitration, the petitioner has to raise its disputes with the Reviewing Authority, and if it is dissatisfied with its decision, approach the Appealing Authority. If the petitioner still is dissatisfied with the decision of Appealing Authority, the petitioner has to raise its dispute with the Dispute Redressal Committee (in short, the 'DRC'). It is only where the petitioner or the respondent is dissatisfied with the decision of the DRC, that arbitration can be invoked.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above procedure cannot be considered as a pre-condition for invocation of the Arbitration Agreement between the parties, inasmuch as the Reviewing Authority, the Appealing Authority, and even the DRC are constituted by the officers of the respondents. He submits that these Authorities, therefore, cannot fairly adjudicate the disputes between the parties. He submits that as the respondents terminated the Agreement and invoked the Bank Guarantee submitted by the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner cannot expect any relief from the respondents.