SUPREME BUILDCON PVT LTD Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has filed this application under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, in short "The act of 1996" for appointment of Arbitrator. The applicant was awarded a contract of extension of Hamidia Hospital New OPD Block including electrification work. The work order was issued to the applicant in this regard on 27.9.2010. The period of completion of work was eighteen months. The applicant did not complete the work within time and abandoned the work. Notice to show cause in regard to termination of contract was issued to the applicant in terms of clause 3 (c) of the agreement on 12.10.2011. The applicant submitted an explanation. However, the competent authority rescinded the contract, vide order dated 26.11.2011 in terms of Clause 3 (c) of the contract agreement.

(2.) The applicant pleaded that the contract of the applicant has been terminated arbitrarily. It had issued a notice in regard to appointment of Arbitrator. However, no Arbitrator was appointed, hence this court has power to appoint arbitrator.

(3.) The respondent in reply pleaded that in terms of Arbitration Agreement the applicant raised a dispute before the Superintendent Engineer invoking Clause 29 of the Agreement. The Superintendent Engineer rejected the claim of the applicant, vide order dated 26.4.2015. The applicant did not file any appeal against the aforesaid order. It is further contended by the respondent that in terms of Clause 29 of the agreement, the applicant can approach before the Arbitration Tribunal, hence the application is not maintainable.