AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Dhruv Bansal, who, appears for the respondent, says that there is no dispute with regard to existence of the Arbitration Agreement in the two contracts, wherein, disputes have erupted between the parties. These two contracts are dated 6.12.2010 and 11.2.2013. The first contract relates to Civil Works, while the second contract pertains to Plumbing Works.

(2.) Evidently, the respondent has appointed an Arbitrator in respect of both the contracts. Concededly, under the agreements, the parties had to first attempt to resolve the dispute amicably. It was only when such an attempt fails, that the parties could appoint an arbitrator in the matter. This aspect of the matter is indicated in Clause 28.1 of the Civil Works Contract. An identical clause is inserted in the Plumbing Works Contract as well. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, Clause 28.1 of the Civil Works Contract is extracted hereunder:

(3.) Interestingly, Clause 28.3 of the Civil Works Contract confers power of appointment of a Sole Arbitrator on the Management Review Committee constituted by the owner, that is, the respondent, whereas, Clause 28.3 of the plumbing works contract simply states that the disputes obtaining between the parties will be referred to the arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as '1996 Act').