RAJBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for reference of certain disputes to the Arbitrator. The case as set up in the petition is that the petitioner was awarded the work of providing "counter berm on the city sides of the left forward Bund from RD 220M to RD 250M" and the work under the contract was completed on 24.10.1989. It is further stated in the petition that the accounts were finalised by the respondents on 28.5.1990. However, by a letter dated 24.6.1996 the respondents raised a demand for a sum of Rs. 40,586.75 paise calling upon the petitioner to deposit the said amount since the same was allegedly not payable to the petitioner. This amount has since been recovered by the respondents from the amount due to the petitioner under some other contract. After this amount had been recovered, the petitioner by letter dated 22.8.1996 invoked the .- provisions of the arbitration agreement for referring certain disputes to the Arbitrator. Besides the dispute of unjustified recovery of Rs. 40,596.75 made in July,1996 the petitioner also sought the dispute about the increase in wages of labour under clause 10C of the contract and compensation in relation to the additional work allegedly executed by the petitioner to be referred to the arbitrator.

(2.) In the reply filed by the respondents a preliminary objection has been taken that the accounts having been finalised on 28,5.1990 the petition was not within time.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties on the question whether the petition was within time and in case this Court was of the view that the claims which are now sought to be referred by the petitioner were not within time, can this Court still refer the dispute about the claim of Rs. 40,586.75 to the Arbitrator being not within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this court?