STEEL FABS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned Counsel of the appellant as well as the learned State Counsel, it transpires that certain dispute cropped up as regards to the implementation of the terms of the agreement dated 12.7.1982 entered into between the parties. Resultantly, the Original Suit No. 37/1989 was launched by M/s Steel Fabs, appellant herein. In due course, the matter came up before the High Court and under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996 (for short, the Act), an application was moved by the appellant for reference of the controversy to the Arbitrator. So, the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court previously appointed Smt. Seema Sirohi on 29.2.2008 as the sole Arbitrator, who for some cause expressed her inability. So, she was succeeded by Smt. Monika Pant on 11.12.2009, who proceeded the matter between the parties and formulated a preliminary issue to the effect "Whether the claimant is real contractor with whom the department entered into the work contract and whether there was any contract, privity of contract between the parties to the arbitration? If so, whether the claimant was liable to complete the work in time as specified in the contract?"

(2.) On the request of the parties duo, the learned Arbitrator thought it proper to adjudicate this preliminary issue first and the view opined was as under:

(3.) As a consequence, rest of the issues no. 2 to 16, which could have effectively adjudicated the controversy between the parties were decided against the claimant/appellant. When such decision of the Arbitrator was challenged before the Court of District Judge in Miscellaneous Case No. 15/2012, such case was decided in negative for the applicant/appellant herein and thus, the finding of the Arbitrator was sustained.