SIDDHI VINAYAK ENTERPRISES Vs. SENIOR DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a contractor. Certain claims have been made, pursuant to which, a request was made for appointment of an Arbitrator on 22.11.2015. Accordingly, sole Arbitrator was appointed, after coming into force of the amendment to Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The learned Arbitrator appointed by the first respondent went into the merits and passed an award. It is accordingly challenged before this Court.

(2.) The only submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that as per Clause 26(3) (a) (ii) of the General Conditions of Contract (for short 'GCC') when the valuation in the claim is more than Rs.10 lakhs, the Tribunal shall constitute three members. Thus there is a fundamental error in the award passed. As there is no jurisdiction to the learned Arbitrator, the matter will have to be sent back to the three member one.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would submit that though Section 12 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, speaks about constitution of the Tribunal which is having any relationship with the parties and thus creating the bar, the proviso provides for dispensing with the same by express agreement in writing. The petitioner did not raise any objection and therefore it should be construed as agreement in writing.