TALSON BUILDERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application, prayer of the applicant is for appointment an Arbitrator. By order dated 24.02.2006, an Arbitrator was appointed. Opposite parties, aggrieved by the aforesaid order, preferred Civil Appeal No. 5605 of 2008 before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court by its order dated 11.09.2008 allowed the said civil appeal, set aside the aforesaid order and remitted the matter back for consideration afresh. While doing so, the Supreme Court observed that the order passed for appointment of Arbitrator was without going into the question as to whether there was any dispute pending between the parties. The said case is reported in 2008 AIR SCW 6423, Union of INdia and Ors. Vs. M/s. Talson Builders. From the pleadings of the parties, it is evident that the applicant presented the final bill in which it has stated that the bill included all the claims raised by it. It is not the case of the applicant that the amount raised in the final bill has not been paid to it but its plea is that it had received the cheque of the amount mentioned in the final bill without prejudice and thereafter raised a demand for appointment of Arbitrator in terms of the agreement and when the Arbitrator was not appointed, it has approached this Court for appointment of Arbitrator. Mr. B.D. Shukla, appearing on behalf of the applicant, submits that in the face of the aforesaid conduct of the applicant of receiving the amount of the final bill without prejudice and thereafter raising dispute, it cannot be said that dispute does not exist for the purpose of appointment of Arbitrator. Mr. S.K. Mishra, however, appearing on behalf of opposite parties, submits that the amount shown in the final bill having been paid undisputedly to the applicant, mere receipt of the amount without prejudice shall not come within the term ''dispute' for the purpose of appointment of the Arbitrator in terms of provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. We find substance in the submission of Mr. Mishra. Undisputedly, the applicant has received the amount shown in the final bill. Though it has received the amount without prejudice, that itself shall not amount to be a dispute for the purpose of referring the matter to the Arbitrator. Had the applicant been paid the amount less than what has been shown in the final bill, then in that circumstance it could be said that the dispute existed. IN my opinion, there has been no dispute within the meaning of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Prayer made by the applicant for appointment of Arbitrator is not fit to be granted. Application stands rejected.