A.P.AVARACHAN Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issues raised in these applications filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are similar. Therefore, these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The facts pleaded in A.R.No.59 of 2011 are referred to for convenience. The applicant and the respondents entered into Annexure -A1 agreement for the construction of 33 KV line from North Paravur to Alangadu. Annexure -A2 is an extract of the instructions to the tenderers, which forms part of Annexure -A1 agreement. According to the applicant, he completed the work and thereafter, issued Annexure -A3 notice demanding revision of rates and also interest on belated payment of the amount due as per the final bill. There was no response to Annexure -A3. Therefore, he submitted Annexure -A4 to the Chief Engineer(Transmission), the third respondent herein requesting him to act as the arbitrator in the dispute between himself and respondents 1 and 2. The Chief Engineer did not take any action and it is therefore, this application has been filed with a prayer to appoint an arbitrator to resolve the dispute raised by the applicant.

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and the contention raised is that Annexures -A1 and A2 do not contain an arbitration clause entitling the applicant to seek the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the alleged dispute between himself and the Board.