STATE OF ORISSA Vs. B C PASAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in this revision contend that the learned Subordinate Judge has erred in law in appointing an arbitrator under Section 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act when there was no dispute between the parties.

(2.) THE opposite party No. 1 entered into agreement No. 7 F-2 of 1968-69 for "construction of Drainage Sluice at Dhanua out fall on Kusabhadra right embankment". He filed an application under Section 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act alleging that in course of the execution of the work he was asked to do a lot of extra items. THE amount due to him for the work executed had not been paid in spite of repeated reminders. He had issued series of registered letters to the department demanding payment; but the petitioners failed to take any action. He issued a notice as per the arbitration clause for the appointment of an arbitrator. As no appointment was made within the period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice, the court might appoint an arbitrator. He filed a copy of the notice sent on 9-1-1982 and received by the Chief Engineer and others on 11-1-1982. In the notice, he alleged that he had repeatedly demanded payment of his dues and in his last notice, he had intimated that unless his legitimate dues were paid, he would invoke the arbitration clause for realisation of the dues.