NATAVARLAL M PATEL Vs. NBCC LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as the `Act') for appointment of an independent arbitrator.

(2.) The parties to this petition entered into an Agreement dated 1th January, 2001 for construction of Fire Station/M.T. Pool Building at Civil Airport, Vadodara[SH: Road Work]. The petitioner is the Proprietorship concern and the respondent is the National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited(in short the `NBCC'). Clause 76 of the Agreement between the parties providing for settlement of disputes by way of arbitration reads as follows:-

(3.) It is not in dispute that upon disputes arising between the parties and in accordance with the above clause, the petitioner had called upon the respondent to appoint an arbitrator by addressing a communication to the CMD, NBCC as provided in the aforesaid clause 76 on 23rd February, 2004 by a letter admittedly received by the respondents within a week. There was no response from the respondent. On 27th March, 2004 the petitioner approached this Court and notice was issued on 6th April, 2004 under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Act. In reply to the arbitration petition, Mr. Mahajan appears on behalf of the respondents and has stated that the respondents have now appointed an arbitrator on 5th June, 2004. It is not in dispute that the said appointment was after the petitioner approached this Court on 27th March, 2004. The position of law in respect of the delayed response to a request for appointment of an arbitrator is to be found in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Datar Switchgears Ltd. Vs Tata Finance Ltd. & Another reported as JT 2000 (Suppl.2) SC 226 wherein the relevant para 19 reads as follows:-